Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: A couple scenarios

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Hello,

    First off, my name is Segev. I'm 17 and I'm considering legally, openly carrying a handgun when I turn 18. The handgun would be registered under my name via intra-familial transfer. I live in California so I thought this post would be best suited to this section.

    I have a couple questions:

    Let's say I'm at a grocery store with my legally openly carried weapon, and a criminal pulls out a gun and attempts to rob the cashier. I see this and then shoot the criminal. Am I within my rights? I was in no direct contact with the criminal other than the fact that we were in the same store.

    Second-An unknown man walks into my house uninvited. He is unarmed. I happen to have a baseball bat with me and break his knees. Am I liable for his injuries? What if he is armed? What if I think he's armed, but he's actually not?

    Thanks for any replies,

    Segev

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289

    Post imported post

    sega18 wrote:
    Hello,

    First off, my name is Segev. I'm 17 and I'm considering legally, openly carrying a handgun when I turn 18. The handgun would be registered under my name via intra-familial transfer. I live in California so I thought this post would be best suited to this section.

    I have a couple questions:

    Let's say I'm at a grocery store with my legally openly carried weapon, and a criminal pulls out a gun and attempts to rob the cashier. I see this and then shoot the criminal. Am I within my rights? I was in no direct contact with the criminal other than the fact that we were in the same store.
    The bad guy has already used lethal force in producing his weapon (doesn't matter if he has shot anyone, or shot at all). The clerk, you, and all others within reach ofhis bullets can honestly and legallyfear for their lives or well being. You are fully justified in using that level of force required to stop his aggression.

    Second-An unknown man walks into my house uninvited. He is unarmed. I happen to have a baseball bat with me and break his knees. Am I liable for his injuries? What if he is armed? What if I think he's armed, but he's actually not?
    If the man is unarmed, has made no threatening gestures or communications, YOU will be arrested for assault and battery. He can also sue the hell out of you.
    If heis armed, you are justifiably in fear for your life or well being, and used that level of force required to stop his aggression.

    Thanks for any replies,

    Segev
    Notice that I did not say shoot to kill, or shoot to wound.

    You use whatever force level is necessary to stop the attack. This may result in a wounding. It may result in a dead bad guy............but that is not your goal. Your purpose, in defense of your life, is to stop him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    sega18 wrote:
    Hello,

    First off, my name is Segev. I'm 17 and I'm considering legally, openly carrying a handgun when I turn 18. The handgun would be registered under my name via intra-familial transfer. I live in California so I thought this post would be best suited to this section.

    I have a couple questions:

    Let's say I'm at a grocery store with my legally openly carried weapon, and a criminal pulls out a gun and attempts to rob the cashier. I see this and then shoot the criminal. Am I within my rights? I was in no direct contact with the criminal other than the fact that we were in the same store. If you were in fear for your life, or in fear that the cashier was going to be killed, then you most likely would be legally justified in shooting the criminal.

    Second-An unknown man walks into my house uninvited. He is unarmed. I happen to have a baseball bat with me and break his knees. Am I liable for his injuries? What if he is armed? What if I think he's armed, but he's actually not?
    Thanks for any replies. This one depends upon what he is doing. If an unarmed man walks into your home, and he doesn't threaten you in any way with physical harm, even if he walks over and picks up your TV and walks out with it, you would not be legally justified in harming him in any fashion. If he is armed, and he makes any hostile or threatening moves towards you that put you in fear for your life, then you would be legally justified in defending yourself. If you just think he is armed, it depends on why you think he is armed. If he points a black toy gun at you, you would reasonably assume that it was a real gun and you would be legally justified in defending yourself. If he reached around to scratch his but and you thought he was going for a gun, sketchy as to whether or not that would sway a jury in your favor. In any case if you shoot/hit/stab someone in your home, expect it to go before a DA.

    Segev
    Hope that helps

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the responses. I was mostly curious about the 'in your home' one.

    Segev

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    sega18 wrote:
    Hello,...
    Welcome to OCDO!!!!

    An internet forum is not the place to learn about this stuff.

    Shooting someone even in totally justified self-defense has huge legal liabilities. Your freedom and your financial future are at stake.

    Your best bet is to get some books on the subject to get started. I suggest:

    In the Gravest Extreme by Massad Ayoob as a first book.

    Possible on-line resources for books:


    • Gunlaws.com
    • Lethal Force Institute's "Police Bookshelf"
    • Paladin Press
    Besides the legalities, there are tactics--a whole different subject in itself. You will want to read up or takeclasses.

    This is very serious stuff. You definitely want to get it right. Even if the answers you get on an internet forum are accurate, the answersmay not be complete.
    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.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the info, Citizen. I'm trying to do all the research I can so that I'm prepared for whatever circumstances I may encounter.

    I'll definitely find a copy of those book. I find nonfiction books a good source of info. If you have any other recommendations I'll be glad to take them.

    Thanks,

    Segev

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    sega18 wrote:
    Second-An unknown man walks into my house uninvited. He is unarmed. I happen to have a baseball bat with me and break his knees. Am I liable for his injuries? What if he is armed? What if I think he's armed, but he's actually not?
    lol probably, knowing CA youll be in court for the rest of your life while some thug that used to live in a trash can is collecting money for the rest of his life. personally thats why i moved out at 17, i couldnt stand that state. if you do decide to carry though, make sure you find a good attorney before hand and arm yourself with as much knowledge as you can.

    what part of CA are you around?

  8. #8
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.


    Yes you will have killed a man, but i reality its better to have killed him than end up in court for 5 years getting sued by him
    The main reason why I run with a 40 and not a 9 is that 3 shots centermass mean that POS is not going to make it yet the rounds are less likely to go through and through like with a 45.

    The military only shoots to wound because it draws out his buddies like bait. plus u cant interrogate a dead person. Hence the reason why the M16 runs with the weak 5.56 nato round

    IF ITS LIFE OR DEATH TAKE HIS TO SAVE OTHERS

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    stuckinchico wrote:
    The military only shoots to wound because it draws out his buddies like bait. plus u cant interrogate a dead person. Hence the reason why the M16 runs with the weak 5.56 nato round
    whered you hear that?

  10. #10
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Personal Experience as I served in Us MArines as a helicopter doorgunner And I was always armed

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    oh just wondering. we were always taught to kill first and then the guys behind us will collect the injured as POWs

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    stuckinchico wrote:
    SNIP Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.
    Sega18,

    The above quoteis a perfect example of being guarded aboutadvice seen on an internet forum.

    That is very dangerous advice. It also paints us as bloodthirsty/vindictive/willing to kill to avoid possible non-lethal legal consequences, etc.

    The law varies from state to state, but most all of them as I understand it only authorize shooting to stop the threat.

    I have never read ofa law that lets someone keep shooting after the attackis stopped just to make sure the bad guy is dead and unable to testify or sue.

    If you continue shooting in order to kill after the threat stops, you could be in very deep hot water legally. Heck, you could be in very deep hot water even if you stop shooting once the threat is over, depending on a hostile prosecutor, lying witnesses, insufficient evidence to corroborate your story, etc.

    Modern forensics may be able to tell that the defender "shot to kill" beyond the shots firedto stop the threat. In which case, here comes the manslaughteror murder charge.

    Once the threat is over, stop shooting.

    Hopefully, the author of the quoted post meant to say shoot at vital areas most likely to immediately shut down theattack, which coincidentally are sometimeslethal, andoverlookedclarifying that one should stop shooting after the threat is over.

    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.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Elk Grove, California, USA
    Posts
    110

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    stuckinchico wrote:
    Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.
    Sega18,

    The above quoteis a perfect example being guarded aboutadvice on an internet forum.

    That is very dangerous advice. It also paints us as bloodthirsty/vindictive/willing to kill to avoid possible non-lethal legal consequences, etc.

    The law varies from state to state, but most all of them as I understand it only authorize shooting to stop the threat.

    I have never read ofa law that lets someone keep shooting after the attackis stopped just to make sure the bad guy is dead and unable to testify or sue.

    If you continue shooting in order to kill after the threat stops, you could be in very deep hot water legally. Heck, you could be in very deep hot water even if you stop shooting once the threat is over, depending on a hostile prosecutor, lying witnesses, insufficient evidence to corroborate your story, etc.

    Modern forensics may be able to tell that the defender "shot to kill" beyond the shots firedto stop the threat. In which case, here comes the manslaughteror murder charge.

    Once the threat is over, stop shooting.
    +1

  14. #14
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    I didnt say keep shooting once the threat stopped....... Make sure u carry the right ammo and place ur shots right center mass its called practice in a life or death sit u brain refers back to training what it knows there are cases out there where officer have hit there targets in life or death sits without looking im googling them now i will post links when i find them


    BTW shoot to kill is also taught to LEOS in Academy and preached by lawyers IN SELF DEFENSE ONLY!!!! lets not get stupid now you just dont stroll up and shoot the pimpled freak behind the counter because he jacked up your order its called common sensE. You carry a weapon, you must accept that someday you may have to use it

  15. #15
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    nukechaser wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    stuckinchico wrote:
    Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.
    Sega18,

    The above quoteis a perfect example being guarded aboutadvice on an internet forum.

    That is very dangerous advice. It also paints us as bloodthirsty/vindictive/willing to kill to avoid possible non-lethal legal consequences, etc.

    The law varies from state to state, but most all of them as I understand it only authorize shooting to stop the threat.

    I have never read ofa law that lets someone keep shooting after the attackis stopped just to make sure the bad guy is dead and unable to testify or sue.

    If you continue shooting in order to kill after the threat stops, you could be in very deep hot water legally. Heck, you could be in very deep hot water even if you stop shooting once the threat is over, depending on a hostile prosecutor, lying witnesses, insufficient evidence to corroborate your story, etc.

    Modern forensics may be able to tell that the defender "shot to kill" beyond the shots firedto stop the threat. In which case, here comes the manslaughteror murder charge.

    Once the threat is over, stop shooting.
    +1
    -1 Guilty til proven innocent??

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    ^^that is the california way unfortunately...

  17. #17
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Thats why as soon as I finish school Im moving But i do have residence here as way of my parents so i will continue to fight for you guys

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

    Post imported post

    stuckinchico wrote:
    SNIP Guilty til proven innocent??
    Literally.

    Remember that in many states, self-defense is an affirmative defense. Meaning you have to prove it was self-defense, not the other way around. Meaning you are guilty until you prove it was self-defense. As one of the gun law books puts it, "Remember that, 'I shot in self-defense' starts with 'I shot'." When you say "I shot", you just admitted to killing that dead body.

    You understand that proving your innocence may cost anywhere from $20-50 thousand dollars in criminal defense legal fees, perhaps more.

    This is not a subject for superficial examination and half-thought ideas.

    Please take the time to read up on the subject.
    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.

  19. #19
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Funny you should say that i Just finished that section IN CRIMINAL LAW 2 passed my final with 100 percent our DA clears self defense case most times in 8 hours

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

    Post imported post

    stuckinchico wrote:
    Funny you should say that i Just finished that section IN CRIMINAL LAW 2 passed my final with 100 percent our DA clears self defense case most times in 8 hours
    Great!! Give that DA a raise and nominate him for governor!

    That does not change the entire secondary career of one Massad Ayoob and the numerous justified self-defense shooting cases he's researched or testified in as an expert witness for the defense. His writings, although a bit stilted towards LE, and exaggerating thedrama a bit (in my opinion), are extensive on this subject.

    Let me be blunt. I am not going to argue with you. Or even have a good natured debate on the subject with you. Giving unsound advice on a crucial subject, then going off on a tangent about a DA that clears self-defense cases, while totally overlooking the rest of the country and reams of self-defense cases that did not get cleared in 8 hours, is notcharacteristic of someone with who I am willing to discuss such an important subject.

    I am glad to hear you did well in your criminal law class. Please let the rest of the new guys learn about the law from sources as reliable or nearly as reliable as you did, where the words are chosen carefully and the material is presented systematically.

    The lawof self-defense, and armed self-defense tactics have already been extensively written about by people much more qualified to 1) know the law, and 2) write well on the subjects, treating them systematically.

    Lets steer the new guys to those sources.
    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 stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    AHhh i get where ya coming from Good idea

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Thanks for all the responses! I'll definitely read up on the matter of carrying a weapon and use of a weapon in self defense before I purchase a pistol. And I'll always take advise with a grain of salt as well.

    I live in the East Bay area, near Oakland.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Citizen is right on the money here. As usual.

  24. #24
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    stuckinchico wrote:
    Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.
    Sega18,

    The above quoteis a perfect example being guarded aboutadvice on an internet forum.

    That is very dangerous advice. It also paints us as bloodthirsty/vindictive/willing to kill to avoid possible non-lethal legal consequences, etc.

    The law varies from state to state, but most all of them as I understand it only authorize shooting to stop the threat.

    I have never read ofa law that lets someone keep shooting after the attackis stopped just to make sure the bad guy is dead and unable to testify or sue.

    If you continue shooting in order to kill after the threat stops, you could be in very deep hot water legally. Heck, you could be in very deep hot water even if you stop shooting once the threat is over, depending on a hostile prosecutor, lying witnesses, insufficient evidence to corroborate your story, etc.

    Modern forensics may be able to tell that the defender "shot to kill" beyond the shots firedto stop the threat. In which case, here comes the manslaughteror murder charge.

    Once the threat is over, stop shooting.
    Thats exactlywhat I was trying to say shoot for vitals not for the leg or arm

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    femoral artery is a vital... just saying

    but yea center mass is still easier to hit and alot more effective

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
  •