Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Deadly force justified?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Here is a description of an event that transpired this weekend to a guy I work with...

    The guy I worked with was over at a friend's party, when one of the invited guests asked to bring over two other guys, and it was okayed. These two other guys obviously didnt like the party or got mad at something, so they left. Subsequently two cars pulled up shortly after with 6 guys who went around back to smoke for awhile, and everyone assumed that they were just other guests. They could see who was where in the house from the back, so they went into the house, and grabbed a bottle of bourbon away from the host. The host reacted, WTF? and one of the guys started beating him. The host was on the ground and the guy was beating this guys face with gorilla type blows with each fist in turn. (witnesses say 30-40 blows) Meanwhile the other 5 start beating the other males including a female whom they punched several times in the back of the head.

    The guy I work with heard the commotion while on his cellphone and came to investigate and was clocked on the side of his face. The host has a severely beaten face and bled profusely after the ordeal. Underage drinking was involved, so they didnt want to call the police. The aggressors were ages 25-30.

    I said along with a couple other guys that deadly force would have been justified. Is this over the top for just a savage beating from a guy who is significantly taller, heavier, and stronger?

    Another guy at work got really angry at me and started cussing me out at my recommendation to shoot, saying "he was a real man and would settle it with his fists" and that it was "just a party fight." He said he used to do the same thing to people at their parties. He said shooting somebody for just beating you and ganging up on you (3 vs 1) is no reason to shoot them.

    Any thoughts on would be appreciated. Keep in mind the original two people who didnt like what was happening at the party sent their crew to handle it. :what:

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    I agree that a spin (whether intentional or unintentional) is probably there. Of course, the best option would have been to closely monitor who showed up at your party.

    I can honestly say I never attended a party that was so large that people just escaped unnoticed or people arrived just to do violence. From what it appears, that might be a party pasttime I didnt know about.

    But assuming these facts to be true, if you are engaged by someone out of your weightclass with no provocation on your part, who is beating you to a pulp, do you take it or if you happen to have a gun, is it underhanded to shoot?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    450

    Post imported post

    I agree with Hank... it sounds like there's more to the story. A bunch of party-goers who are without some of their reasoning faculties are not who I'd put much stock in being able to rationalize or justify escalating a drunken fight into deadly-force.

    This situation very well may have been stopped by forceful self-defense, but it certainly could(should) have been avoided in the first place.

    I attended a few parties like that when I was much younger... it was never worth it.

    As to the basic question, whether or not several larger unarmed guys attempting to beat someone up is 'deadly-force'... Yes, it is. Absent any other wrong-doing or provocation, the host would certainly have been justified in defending himself with sufficient force to stop the attack.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Thank you for your response. The guy who got angry said he and his friends used to pick fights by provoking one "partygoer" into a fight. The instigator would be standing face to face, and his cronies would be standing off to the left and the right of the intended target. When the "partygoer" had enough and went to swing, all three of them would swing on the guys head (front, left, and right blows simultaneous). They thought it was fun to beat someone like that.

    Youthful stupidity and plain malice are not equal.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Reminds me of a college party I went to decades ago. PM me about "you're not about love, dude" for a politically-incorrect laugh.

    -ljp

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Probably had something to do with someones girlfriend getting looked at the wrong way when you pull all the bs off the story.

    Regardless, you could make an argument for deadly force, I think it would be justified in this situation, at least if you were the one being beaten, and in some states even if you were a bystandard watching.

    However, you do not want to try to make a case for why you used deadly force when alcohol is in the equation, in these types of situations, at least I would try to physically stop the argument, if you had enough of your friends around at the time, otherwise you may want to try something ltl, or hell maybe that new retarded flashlight with the pepper spray.

    Some people make poor decisions when they drink, not saying you or your friend do, but if you had your life in a jury's hands trying to make your case, you don't want to have to say you fired at them while you were drinking in someone elses home.

    But through my interpretation of the law, I think you could have made a case to use deadly force justly.

    Obviously the police would not have immediately shot at these people, they probably would have used batons, pepper spray, zip tie them, whatever, but that is because they have the ability to escalate the level of force until they comply.

    When you only have a gun, its a hard call.

    Make sure you know when deadly force is justified in your locale.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Collier 4385,

    Check out this website for a good start: www.firearmstactical.com.
    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.

  8. #8
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    ...When you only have a gun, its a hard call...
    Reminds me of a quote I read/use - When all you have is a gun, everything looks like a nail.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    somewhere, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    232

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Collier 4385,

    Check out this website for a good start: http://www.firearmstactical.com.
    Did you read the section titled:" Display your gun, go to jail ".

    I don't think they know much about the law if they are making statements like that.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    SP101 wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Collier 4385,

    Check out this website for a good start: http://www.firearmstactical.com.
    Did you read the section titled:" Display your gun, go to jail ".

    I don't think they know much about the law if they are making statements like that.
    I did. Read a little further down, they modify it a little bit. Also, I've heard other expertssay similar. I think they are proceeding from the ideas that OC is not legal wherever, and that citizens are too jumpy and will scream "man with gun" at the mere sight. In the context of self-defense, it makes sense to not pull back your jacket just because some guy cut in front of you in the check out line. Its not perfect advice, but it will keep you out of trouble until you learn the fine points and develop enough knowledge to have a more refined judgement.
    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.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    somewhere, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    232

    Post imported post

    I did. Read a little further down, they modify it a little bit. Also, I've heard other expertssay similar. I think they are proceeding from the ideas that OC is not legal wherever, and that citizens are too jumpy and will scream "man with gun" at the mere sight. In the context of self-defense, it makes sense to not pull back your jacket just because some guy cut in front of you in the check out line. Its not perfect advice, but it will keep you out of trouble until you learn the fine points and develop enough knowledge to have a more refined judgement.
    I did read the whole thing. I am not knocking what you linked to, I am just saying that that part is very much incorrect.

    In open carry states, you will not be put in jail just for open carrying or someone just seeing a gun on someone.

    There is some very good advice on that site, and one must use good judgement as to when to defend yourself or flee.

    Thanks for your link.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    It seems to me, if you're committed to defending yourself and you choose to carry a gun, then you really CANNOT justify being drunk at the same time. Here's my novel suggestion:

    Have a designated shooter like we have designated drivers!!!

    The whole party atmosphere, underage drinking, drugs, whatever, does not lend itself to any kind of rational thought or the kind of judgment I want to have at my disposal when lethal force may be required. Have somebody around who can think clearly enough to judge the level of response necessary to a situation like this.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Izod wrote:
    It seems to me, if you're committed to defending yourself and you choose to carry a gun, then you really CANNOT justify being drunk at the same time. Here's my novel suggestion:

    Have a designated shooter like we have designated drivers!!!

    The whole party atmosphere, underage drinking, drugs, whatever, does not lend itself to any kind of rational thought or the kind of judgment I want to have at my disposal when lethal force may be required. Have somebody around who can think clearly enough to judge the level of response necessary to a situation like this.
    I agree. I personally have not yet matured to the point where I don't enjoy going out on the town with my friends from work, but I never ever carry when doing so. Assuming we are drinking in Virginia, Clarendon, for instance, this would require me to OC, which means answering lots of questions and probably getting booted form any establishments we enter. In addition, I like to drink socially, and being under the influence of alcohol while carrying is not only illegal, it's also asking for lots of trouble.

    Bottom line is that drinking is a risk that leaves you unable to think clearly or respond quickly. Choosing not to carry in such a circumstance is, in my opinion, riskier than not carrying. The danger of doing something stupid in this configuration is greater than the danger of being caught unarmed by thugs, in my judgement.

    Since I started carrying, I do not party like I used to, because I dislike the degradation of thinking and awareness that comes with it. But I do allow myself to be social from time to time, and I accept the risks of doing so, and the risk of being unarmed.

    In the situation described in the OP, the victims of the beating are guilty of not being aware of their surroundings, condition white. Usually, unless you are really drunk, you can tell when things don't look right, and you should take precautions. If you've ever been in a bar right before a fight breaks out you know what I mean. This in no way excuses the aggressors who delivered the beating. Had there been a few sober souls present, perhaps things might have been different, but what fun is that?

  14. #14
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    openryan wrote:
    ...When you only have a gun, its a hard call...
    Reminds me of a quote I read/use - When all you have is a gun, everything looks like a nail.
    The quote youre talking about is

    When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. -Abraham Maslow-

    And while it certainly applies to some circumstances, I think that the tunnel vision people get during a crisis ended up reducing possible resolutions. In these circumstances set before us, there was a reluctance to involve the police due to underaged drinking. This elminated a tool to resolve the problem of the brutal assault.

    I would have been inclined to drawmy weapon and inform the assailant that I was placing them under citizens arrest for the assault, and instructed someone to contact 911 to dispatch law enforcement to accept an arrestee being held at gun point.


    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  15. #15
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    I'm sorry Hank, I see what you are saying about the people being unarmed, however, when it is 3 against 1 and those guys are huge people, what chance do you really think you would have against them if you were that person? And don't think others in the party would help you, because we all know that people are, by their very nature, not willing to be involved in a situation they are not already involved in. In that situation, I would feel justified in pulling my weapon to protect my life, feeling that my life was indeed in danger, and pulling the trigger if necessary.

    Now, as has been said already, if I am carrying, I'm not drinking or under the influence of anything. So this situation most likely would not happen, besides the fact that I never go to parties or anything like that just for this reason. They ALWAYS seem to get out of hand for one reason or another.......

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    In a perfect scenario, underage drinking would not have been the issue, and whoever had the original complaint would not have sent 6 other people to handle it.

    However, considering the situation was escalated by the complaintant by sending 6 people in to cause injury to the host, and all of the males would pummeled by 6 physically stronger men, I am not sure about the situation. Since I do not imbibe or take mind altering drugs (whether illegal or pharmeceutical), I would view a straight on attack as life threatening. If my opponent swings first without reason and he has people backing him up, I am going to seek a means to equalize or overcome the disadvantage.

    Head trauma can kill someone just as well as a bullet. It made me think about my views on it. I have reached this conclusion:

    1. Avoid parties where drinking will be taking place by underage/immature people. recipe for disaster.

    2. Maintain high situational awareness at all times and have an escape plan mentally mapped out. Maintain sobriety.

    3. If verbally engaged, continue to maintain a physical distance. Don't antagonize back. If they continue to advance, give warning that continued advance would be unwise.

    4. If the situation deteriorates and escape is no longer an option and someone does do violence to you, and you feel you must shoot, make sure you have exhausted all peaceable avenues.

    5. 3 vs 1 is not a fair fight. Make sure Samuel Moses Browning is one of the guests.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    Unarmed guys can't really kill you
    You know far, far less than you think you do.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    We're doing a lot of role playing here. Personally, I think role playing is absolutely crucial to our ability to make split second decisions involving matters of life and death. While you can't envision every situation you may encounter, you can sure use mental imaging and ask a lot of what ifs as you go through your day and that may help you act when the stress of a life-threatening situation occurs. I'm sure we can all attest to the fact that when faced with that kind of stress, we often revert to more instinctive levels of action so it's in our best interests to think about these things before the time comes.

    In this particular situation, we tried to put ourselves in the room with "gorilla blows" falling on someone's head, underage age drinking going on, everybody buzzed and...well, whatcha gonna do now? The real question you have to ask yourself is "Would I have been there?" or "Would I have let it get to this point?" I harp on my boys, "Be aware of your surroundings!" If you were in this situation and you were SURPRISED by what happened, then you ignored a helluva lot of big red flags.

    If you are the owner of the house, you are to blame for the ground rules to start with. If your ground rules were okay to start but you saw the party going the wrong way...you've got the power of the light switch and the on/off button on the music and the nozzle on the keg.

    If you're just a guest, I don't think it would be too hard to see the direction the party's going. Tap your friends on the shoulder early on, share your concerns and let 'em know you're heading to a different location.

    Avoiding the need to employ lethal force is a lot better choice in this case.

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Once you're down, you can't roll with the punches and/or kicks. The blows cause more damage.
    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.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    The Ten Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Moves Every Cop Should Knowhttp://www.grapplearts.com/BJJ-for-Police.htm

    The above link might come in handy if you find yourself on the ground...


    If you're the homeowner and you haven't avoided the situation and you find yourself on your back with three big guys kicking the s**t out of you, you have to make a quick analysis of their Intent, Ability and Opportunity to do you serious bodily harm. If you're tough enough to take 'em on without resorting to the use of a firearm, then good for you....they don't meet the "Ability" part of the equation and you keep the gun out of it. However, if they meet all three conditions, then you may have no other choice.




  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    I have to wonder a little bit if the possibility of grave bodily injury or death isn't greater. Brain injuries. Eye damage. Broken orbital socket of the eye, jaw. Blow or kick to the head that results in deafness. A kick to the groin that crushes one or both testes.

    In his video, Judicious Use of Deadly Force, Mas Ayoob discusses disparity of numbers and talks about being down,taking blows, and being unable to soften the blow by rolling with it as you can when standing. He tells the class that later in the week he will show them the photos of people who died that way. (Its a video of an actualclasslecture at Lethal Force Institute).

    A party full of 1/2 drunks are less capable of recognizing somebody may be killed or badly injured if the beating continues. I'd hate to rely on them for help.

    If I'm down and unable to almost immediately rise, I'm in serious trouble, whether by numbers who put me back down, or by pain or injury, if the attack continues.

    I'm thinking that if I can't immediately regain my feet, and the blows are still coming, even if there is just one attacker, the gun is coming out. If he stops right then, great. If he doesn't, I'm afraid I'll have to stop the attack. I cannot afford to let him decide when to stop. When would that be? When he's out of steam? What if he has decided to try to kill me. What if he doesn't know how much injury can really be done? Or does not, in his rage, care?
    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.

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Not sure to what you're referring, HankT. I'm referring to the guy on the floor taking 30-40 blows.

    I've thought about having non-lethal devices for self-defense, but I can't really carry baton, stun-gun, OC, flashlight, spare ammo, and firearm in preparation for gradual escalation.It just doesn't seem workable. For the moment,I'mprepared device-wise for the worst case need, more or less. Even so,I won't be drawing or shooting unless I'm legally justified.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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