Aaron1124
Regular Member
imported post
So I was browsing Yahoo Answers, reading self defense stories from people. I found one that read this:
"My brother is a maintenance man for an apartment complex. He has been for several years. He has carried a concealed firearm, in accordance to the law, since he's been employed, even though it's strictly against company policies to carry a firearm while performing the duties of your job.
Anyway, last month on the 1st, an armed man in a ski mask came in to the office and demanded that they give him all of the cash from renters. The leasing agent was complying, but the man seemed like he was on drugs, and kept brandishing his firearm at her, and his finger was in the trigger. My brother was nearby, and took advantage of a clean shot he had. He opened fire, and killed the robber.
On a quick side note, I'm wondering if the robber was a former (or even current) resident, because he seemed aware that the apartment complex holds on to all of the money from renters until the 6th of the month when they send it to the management office. Not to mention there are several hundred units there.
Anyway, to skip to the chase, my brother was interviewed by the police, and the police and prosecutors office felt he acted within the realms of self defense, and was not charged, because his actions were considered "justifiable homicide" which fell under RCW 9A.16.050, which reads
RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or
(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
Anyway, he was terminated from his job because of his possession of a firearm. What are your thoughts on this entire situation? My brother is very proficient in firearms and firearm knowledge, and said the guy was exhibiting every bit of reason to think that the firearm could go off without him even intending to. In my eyes, his life, and the life of the leasing agent were in imminent danger, considering the robber had a gun, and was violently and carelessly brandishing it with his finger on the trigger."
Here's the first responder:
"Sounds like complete bull. Your brother was in no danger and at no point is it legal for some joe blow to shoot someone involved in a robber that the joe blow is not a part of. In other words, if you had a gun and walked by a liquor store that was being held up and you shot and killed the perp you would be in trouble, even moreso than the perp.
I call troll. A rare, clearly educated troll, but still a troll nonetheless."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, regardless of if the asker was trolling or not ( I give him the benefit of the doubt), why is it that the RCW is sitting there directly in front of the "answerer", and they completely disregard it, and claim that it's unlawful? That's exactly what I mean by being an idiot.
So I was browsing Yahoo Answers, reading self defense stories from people. I found one that read this:
"My brother is a maintenance man for an apartment complex. He has been for several years. He has carried a concealed firearm, in accordance to the law, since he's been employed, even though it's strictly against company policies to carry a firearm while performing the duties of your job.
Anyway, last month on the 1st, an armed man in a ski mask came in to the office and demanded that they give him all of the cash from renters. The leasing agent was complying, but the man seemed like he was on drugs, and kept brandishing his firearm at her, and his finger was in the trigger. My brother was nearby, and took advantage of a clean shot he had. He opened fire, and killed the robber.
On a quick side note, I'm wondering if the robber was a former (or even current) resident, because he seemed aware that the apartment complex holds on to all of the money from renters until the 6th of the month when they send it to the management office. Not to mention there are several hundred units there.
Anyway, to skip to the chase, my brother was interviewed by the police, and the police and prosecutors office felt he acted within the realms of self defense, and was not charged, because his actions were considered "justifiable homicide" which fell under RCW 9A.16.050, which reads
RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or
(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
Anyway, he was terminated from his job because of his possession of a firearm. What are your thoughts on this entire situation? My brother is very proficient in firearms and firearm knowledge, and said the guy was exhibiting every bit of reason to think that the firearm could go off without him even intending to. In my eyes, his life, and the life of the leasing agent were in imminent danger, considering the robber had a gun, and was violently and carelessly brandishing it with his finger on the trigger."
Here's the first responder:
"Sounds like complete bull. Your brother was in no danger and at no point is it legal for some joe blow to shoot someone involved in a robber that the joe blow is not a part of. In other words, if you had a gun and walked by a liquor store that was being held up and you shot and killed the perp you would be in trouble, even moreso than the perp.
I call troll. A rare, clearly educated troll, but still a troll nonetheless."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, regardless of if the asker was trolling or not ( I give him the benefit of the doubt), why is it that the RCW is sitting there directly in front of the "answerer", and they completely disregard it, and claim that it's unlawful? That's exactly what I mean by being an idiot.
.