Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: justified self defense shooting

  1. #1
    Regular Member kryptonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    248

    justified self defense shooting

    saw this story on fox2 website -

    http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news...-rage-shooting

    heated words at traffic light - drivers both got out and a fight started. CPL carrier shot and killed assailant after he said he was attacked by multiple assailants. former prosecutor put it well in news video.

  2. #2
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    seems like a "little" blame to go around. Why get out of the car to start with? Now after retreating to your car as I think I heard to read in the posted article--- that fits for "DISENGAGEMENT" with the shooter's intent to end the conflict and he is "surrounded" by several angry persons one with a bottle....

    No charges filed by prosecutor..... seems like he was justified in his actions.

    None of the family of the person who lost his life seem to claim that THEY WERE ON SCENE, But the shooter/surviver did have 2 family members present... I am sure they were interviewed by LEO's ( OK, Assumption here, but given the circumstances it would be a HUGE failure on the investigators to not interview them).

    Now come the civil charges....

  3. #3
    Regular Member malignity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,101
    Ah yes. I remember hearing this story before.

    Good for the man who defended himself. If you make poor choices, you live with the consequences. Multiple assailants can easily kill a man. One of them had a weapon. Clear cut. Sure the family may not agree, HOWEVER, their father made a poor choice (apparently more than once, being previously charged with assault) and had consequences that followed. Don't be mad at the shooter, be mad at the person that made the poor choice to begin with.
    All opinions posted on opencarry.org are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of opencarry.org or Michigan Open Carry Inc.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Thumbs up

    our castle doctrie allows us to defend ourselves with no duty to retreat, and no fear of civil suit.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    The thug that was shot was arrested previously for assault with intent to murder and they claim hes an angel? Am I missing something?


    Quote Originally Posted by kryptonian View Post
    saw this story on fox2 website -

    http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news...-rage-shooting

    heated words at traffic light - drivers both got out and a fight started. CPL carrier shot and killed assailant after he said he was attacked by multiple assailants. former prosecutor put it well in news video.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then 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." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  6. #6
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    seems like a "little" blame to go around. Why get out of the car to start with? Now after retreating to your car as I think I heard to read in the posted article--- that fits for "DISENGAGEMENT" with the shooter's intent to end the conflict and he is "surrounded" by several angry persons one with a bottle....

    No charges filed by prosecutor..... seems like he was justified in his actions.

    None of the family of the person who lost his life seem to claim that THEY WERE ON SCENE, But the shooter/surviver did have 2 family members present... I am sure they were interviewed by LEO's ( OK, Assumption here, but given the circumstances it would be a HUGE failure on the investigators to not interview them).

    Now come the civil charges....
    Nope.
    A person who used force as permitted by Michigan law is immune from BOTH criminal prosecution and from any civil action for the use of that force.

    Part of Michigan's "Stand Your Ground Law", Public Act No. 314 of 2006, states:

    Sec. 2922b. An individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force in self-defense or in defense of another individual in compliance with section 2 of the self-defense act is immune from civil liability for damages caused to either of the following by the use of that deadly force or force other than deadly force:
    (a) The individual against whom the use of deadly force or force other than deadly force is authorized.
    (b) Any individual claiming damages arising out of injury to or the death of the individual described in subdivision (a), based upon his or her relationship to that individual.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  7. #7
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailenforcer View Post
    The thug that was shot was arrested previously for assault with intent to murder and they claim hes an angel? Am I missing something?
    Was thinking EXACTLY the same thing. I liked how immediately after the newsreader mentioned that little bit of information, the daughter states: "He was a good dad..."
    I also had to appreciate the great acting skills that the wife/girlfirend of the one who died had to have to actually state that the shooter needed counseling because he shot her spouse/boyfriend while the shooter's children were in the car. What the #$%# was he going to do... let someone possibly hurt his kids? I would be much more willing to take a beating with my children absent than have them present.

    The real question is why A GROUP OF ADULTS (the attackers) would continue the attack, surrounding a person in their car, when there are children present. Her spouse/boyfriend was culpable on that issue alone. Her criticism of the CPL holder seems much more applicable to her significant other than the person she is attempting to blame.

    I hate to say it because usually I think something like this could have been avoided if either person would have just dropped their ego a little, but good riddance. It appears the CPL holder attempted to leave, kids were in the car, and the cpl holder was outnumbered...imho, the person who was shot did everything possible to have a few chunks of lead sent in his direction... and the shooter obliged him. Case closed.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    Here's a problem I see that has yet to be addressed.

    I will first take a real life experience of my own back in the late 1980's

    I was followed by a vehicle with 4 college aged punks. I ignored them as I figured they would get bored following me. I was wrong. This started at 12 and Van Dyke in Warren. I lived not far from 9 mile and Hoover back then. Heading home I realized they were still following me and had to make a decision to NOT ho directly home, as I didn't need them knowing where I lived if they were as stupid as I eventually found out they were. I took a detour into Detroit's 8 Mile and Hoover/Groesbeck industrial area hoping they would break off and maybe I was being overly paranoid. I passed a buddies home which I had hoped was home but he wasn't so I circled the blocks and they were now closing in on me fast. I could hear threats shouted and one morons threw beer bottle at my car. They finally started to literally tail gate me to the point that if I stopped I knew they would jump from their car and assault me. I made a turn on an unfamiliar street and found out it was a dead end with no sign saying it was. Near the end of that street I quickly negotiated a 180 facing them. All they could see is my headlights. all 4 morons exited the car with baseball bats and one idiot had a gulf club and the last had a tire iron. As they approached I warned them to leave or else. Two morons coming running at me then suddenly stopped as they saw my Colt 70 series Government Model staring at them. They broke and back peddled screaming he has a gun. I warned them to drop their weapons or I would start shooting and they complied. I let them leave instead of risk the need to shoot them in case they got even more stupid.
    The Police did stop them and they were arrested after a quick call from me.

    Now how do we know this man with his children didn't have a similar situation where standing his ground was better than trying to flee and risk someone ramming his car? We don't!

    He may have had no better option than stand his ground. The claims words were exchanged could be him telling them to leave him alone or something legitimate. We don't know. Fact is the dead man is a known thug who has tried to MURDER someone in the past, he has a known record of violence, so why do people Monday Morning Quarterback the man who defended his children?

    I agree with DR Todd, I might stand and fight when alone, but never with innocents in my protection, I will do anything to protect them PERIOD!

    I grow weary of that group on this site who always take the anti gunners mentality or side, no matter how messed up it is.


    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    Was thinking EXACTLY the same thing. I liked how immediately after the newsreader mentioned that little bit of information, the daughter states: "He was a good dad..."
    I also had to appreciate the great acting skills that the wife/girlfirend of the one who died had to have to actually state that the shooter needed counseling because he shot her spouse/boyfriend while the shooter's children were in the car. What the #$%# was he going to do... let someone possibly hurt his kids? I would be much more willing to take a beating with my children absent than have them present.

    The real question is why A GROUP OF ADULTS (the attackers) would continue the attack, surrounding a person in their car, when there are children present. Her spouse/boyfriend was culpable on that issue alone. Her criticism of the CPL holder seems much more applicable to her significant other than the person she is attempting to blame.

    I hate to say it because usually I think something like this could have been avoided if either person would have just dropped their ego a little, but good riddance. It appears the CPL holder attempted to leave, kids were in the car, and the cpl holder was outnumbered...imho, the person who was shot did everything possible to have a few chunks of lead sent in his direction... and the shooter obliged him. Case closed.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then 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." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    It is OBVIOUS you never worked in a Law Enforcement venue.

    The car is called the coffin for good reason.

    I see no blame on the part of the defender. I was not there and I was NOT surrounded at a traffic light by a mob. If I was I would exit my car to engage them as sitting in that car is a death sentence. One had a bottle and how would you or I know some were not armed with guns? We will never know at that time, until it was too late. Seems to me he did what was his only option to get ready to defend instead of be a victim.

    I disagree with DR Todd I think the girlfriends acting job was awfully fake.


    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    seems like a "little" blame to go around. Why get out of the car to start with? Now after retreating to your car as I think I heard to read in the posted article--- that fits for "DISENGAGEMENT" with the shooter's intent to end the conflict and he is "surrounded" by several angry persons one with a bottle....

    No charges filed by prosecutor..... seems like he was justified in his actions.

    None of the family of the person who lost his life seem to claim that THEY WERE ON SCENE, But the shooter/surviver did have 2 family members present... I am sure they were interviewed by LEO's ( OK, Assumption here, but given the circumstances it would be a HUGE failure on the investigators to not interview them).

    Now come the civil charges....
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then 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." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    1+

    We really don't know of one may have had a hidden knife or gun.


    Quote Originally Posted by malignity View Post
    Ah yes. I remember hearing this story before.

    Good for the man who defended himself. If you make poor choices, you live with the consequences. Multiple assailants can easily kill a man. One of them had a weapon. Clear cut. Sure the family may not agree, HOWEVER, their father made a poor choice (apparently more than once, being previously charged with assault) and had consequences that followed. Don't be mad at the shooter, be mad at the person that made the poor choice to begin with.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then 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." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  11. #11
    Regular Member malignity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,101
    The guy apparently had a champagne bottle. Good enough for me.

    See, the thing is, even without the bottle, the disparity of force is very significant here. Multiple unarmed assailants can easily kill one man... the bottle was just 'frosting on the cake' so to speak imo.
    Last edited by malignity; 11-08-2010 at 04:22 PM.
    All opinions posted on opencarry.org are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of opencarry.org or Michigan Open Carry Inc.

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailenforcer View Post
    It is OBVIOUS you never worked in a Law Enforcement venue.

    The car is called the coffin for good reason.

    I see no blame on the part of the defender. I was not there and I was NOT surrounded at a traffic light by a mob. If I was I would exit my car to engage them as sitting in that car is a death sentence. One had a bottle and how would you or I know some were not armed with guns? We will never know at that time, until it was too late. Seems to me he did what was his only option to get ready to defend instead of be a victim.

    I disagree with DR Todd I think the girlfriends acting job was awfully fake.
    Me thinks I've failed to communicate here...

    As I understand it... BOTH drivers exit vehicles, words are exchanged, ONE driver returns to his vehicle, OTHER driver and occupants of his vehicle continue with aggressive actions, Driver who has returned to car uses a lethal weapon to stop the continued attack against him.

    My initial blame sharing here is WHY GET OUT OF THE CAR IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOU HAVE A WAY TO LEAVE THE AREA. Article and news report don't give us much info here. Now IF I have no way to leave in the vehicle I would have left the vehicle and taken my firearm with me in the FIRST PLACE-- not to be an agressor but to have ALL my defensive tools immediately available to me IF THEY WERE TO BE NEEDED!

  13. #13
    Regular Member NHCGRPR45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield Township, MI
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    seems like a "little" blame to go around. Why get out of the car to start with? Now after retreating to your car as I think I heard to read in the posted article--- that fits for "DISENGAGEMENT" with the shooter's intent to end the conflict and he is "surrounded" by several angry persons one with a bottle....

    No charges filed by prosecutor..... seems like he was justified in his actions.

    None of the family of the person who lost his life seem to claim that THEY WERE ON SCENE, But the shooter/surviver did have 2 family members present... I am sure they were interviewed by LEO's ( OK, Assumption here, but given the circumstances it would be a HUGE failure on the investigators to not interview them).

    Now come the civil charges....
    the family can't sue, it was ruled justified.

    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    our castle doctrie allows us to defend ourselves with no duty to retreat, and no fear of civil suit.
    yup!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bailenforcer View Post
    The thug that was shot was arrested previously for assault with intent to murder and they claim hes an angel? Am I missing something?
    yes, you are. i am CERTAIN he felt really, really bad about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by malignity View Post
    The guy apparently had a champagne bottle. Good enough for me.

    See, the thing is, even without the bottle, the disparity of force is very significant here. Multiple unarmed assailants can easily kill one man... the bottle was just 'frosting on the cake' so to speak imo.
    indeed, against multiple BG even if they were not "armed" they all still had enough weapons to easily maim, kill or otherwise cause great bodily harm, and i also agree with another poster i think it was bail?? that said my BS meter hits an all time low when i have my daughter with me. anytime i have her with me and someone starts to bother me about anything the FIRST thing i say is "i have my child with me, and you are frightening her, leave me alone." in a very no BS voice. there aren't many who would continue with an engagement after that, most of us understand about wanting to protect or children and most common sense people will back down or stop what they are doing when confronted with continuing an assault with children present.

    any that do are a special breed of a**hat.
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

    Michigan Concealed Pistol Instructor. Cost 80.00 With advanced techniques included free. PM for more information!

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    Me thinks I've failed to communicate here...

    As I understand it... BOTH drivers exit vehicles, words are exchanged, ONE driver returns to his vehicle, OTHER driver and occupants of his vehicle continue with aggressive actions, Driver who has returned to car uses a lethal weapon to stop the continued attack against him.

    My initial blame sharing here is WHY GET OUT OF THE CAR IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOU HAVE A WAY TO LEAVE THE AREA. Article and news report don't give us much info here. Now IF I have no way to leave in the vehicle I would have left the vehicle and taken my firearm with me in the FIRST PLACE-- not to be an agressor but to have ALL my defensive tools immediately available to me IF THEY WERE TO BE NEEDED!
    Simple, the CPL holder had the good sense to recognise that the situation would continue to escelate, and two things would likely happen if he attempted to leave. 1, the CPL holder likely did not want to initiate a chase that would endanger himself, his family, and the public. 2, He would lose control, and tactical advantage, because the agressor would then be behind him, following him. The advantage in a car chase, always goes to the following vehicle, the following vehicle, has a clear path, and knows that if the lead car has made a turn at a given speed, then the follower can likewise make the corner. Also, the follower can easily see what is coming, the lead car has to make it up as it comes. Any trained driver, ie. police officer would know this.

    Kudos to the CPL holder to have the presence of mind during stress to see this coming.
    Last edited by stainless1911; 11-08-2010 at 10:11 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member kryptonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    248
    i agree with everybody who pointed out the whole get out of vehicle escalation. would he have gotten out of the car without his weapon? i'm sure that is a big factor in the prosecutors review of this. they seemed to have cleared this case pretty quick. i guess the daughter in the story thought that the CPL holder should have sat there and allow her dad and relatives to severly beat him unchallenged. story didn't say but i bet that shot took the fight right out of everybody else there. i'm also sure the CPL holder had to hold off the others at gunpoint until the police arrived. for the people that choose violence as a method to solve their adversity i guess this will thin the herd.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Bailenforcer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    City
    Posts
    1,077
    Having an angry mob in vehicles following you is not a defensible situation, therefore he was right to face to attackers as opposed to fleeing and having his weakest side (backside) to their attacks. In my situation when it became obvious it was going to escalate so I got out of that rolling coffin to stand my ground. It worked for me and no one was hurt, sadly the MOB was out for blood, and sadly got what they wanted.......Blood. They didn't figure it might backfire on them.

    The only one I feel for is the Father who had to make that horrible decision and the child who had to witness it.


    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    Me thinks I've failed to communicate here...

    As I understand it... BOTH drivers exit vehicles, words are exchanged, ONE driver returns to his vehicle, OTHER driver and occupants of his vehicle continue with aggressive actions, Driver who has returned to car uses a lethal weapon to stop the continued attack against him.

    My initial blame sharing here is WHY GET OUT OF THE CAR IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOU HAVE A WAY TO LEAVE THE AREA. Article and news report don't give us much info here. Now IF I have no way to leave in the vehicle I would have left the vehicle and taken my firearm with me in the FIRST PLACE-- not to be an agressor but to have ALL my defensive tools immediately available to me IF THEY WERE TO BE NEEDED!
    Last edited by Bailenforcer; 11-08-2010 at 11:16 PM.
    Exo 22:2 "If anyone catches a thief breaking in and hits him so that he dies, he is not guilty of murder.
    Luke 22:36: "Then 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." Luk 11:21 "When a strong man, with all his weapons ready, guards his own house, all his belongings are safe.

  17. #17
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    seems like a "little" blame to go around. Why get out of the car to start with?
    While the facts of this incident are yet to be sorted out and proven, the sharing of blame does not start with someone getting out of their car. Often, exiting your vehicle is actually tactically superior to remaining seated in it, if you are in a situation of a potential threat approaching and those are your two choices. What matters, as far as the "blame" game, is what you do after exiting your vehicle.

    Believe me, if I'm in my car, sense a potential threat approaching, and my choices are to stay seated in the car, practically immobile, or exit it and have 360 degree mobility while I further assess the situation and respond accordingly, I am going to get out of the car. No one can rightfully "blame" me for anything just based on that. Now, if (after exiting) I do something that rightfully give me a share of the "blame", then so be it.

    You need to think through a little better the point at which you feel it is appropriate to start assigning blame.
    Last edited by DanM; 11-09-2010 at 01:31 PM.
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  18. #18
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    While the facts of this incident are yet to be sorted out and proven, the sharing of blame does not start with someone getting out of their car. Often, exiting your vehicle is actually tactically superior to remaining seated in it, if you are in a situation of a potential threat approaching and those are your two choices. What matters, as far as the "blame" game, is what you do after exiting your vehicle.

    Believe me, if I'm in my car, sense a potential threat approaching, and my choices are to stay seated in the car, practically immobile, or exit it and have 360 degree mobility while I further assess the situation and respond accordingly, I am going to get out of the car. No one can rightfully "blame" me for anything just based on that. Now, if (after exiting) I do something that rightfully give me a share of the "blame", then so be it.

    You need to think through a little better the point at which you feel it is appropriate to start assigning blame.
    The assumption being made by some posting on this thread is the the surviving driver leaving the car initially HAD NO OTHER OPTIONS. And this is my point... NOTHING in the story yet tells me that the driver was "trapped" in his car with no way to DRIVE away and leave the scene INSTEAD OF GETTING OUT OF THE CAR. GIVEN THE OPTION OF LEAVING THE SCENE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE WISER THING TO DO--- Now, if he was UNABLE to leave the scene/area, I agree with the other options.
    Last edited by JoeSparky; 11-09-2010 at 07:46 PM. Reason: to add:"some posting on this thread" for added clarity

  19. #19
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailenforcer View Post
    It is OBVIOUS you never worked in a Law Enforcement venue.

    The car is called the coffin for good reason.

    I see no blame on the part of the defender. I was not there and I was NOT surrounded at a traffic light by a mob. If I was I would exit my car to engage them as sitting in that car is a death sentence. One had a bottle and how would you or I know some were not armed with guns? We will never know at that time, until it was too late. Seems to me he did what was his only option to get ready to defend instead of be a victim.

    I disagree with DR Todd I think the girlfriends acting job was awfully fake.
    My Solstice GXP does 150. I-696, which is near 10 and Van Dyke is 4 lanes wide. Let them try and catch me...

    If I got suspicious of being followed I'd call 911 as I hightailed it to the closest freeway to lose them. If my fiancée was in the car, she'd be handling the 911 call.

    This is just how I would handle such a situation. Your milage may vary.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  20. #20
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    We may not know all the facts here, and we can speculate all we want..

    However..

    I would be willing to bet that investigators got the information that we don't have. Just sayin.

    It is hard for us to figure if he was justified or not, because we don't know what the investigators know.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    The assumption being made by some posting on this thread is the the surviving driver leaving the car initially HAD NO OTHER OPTIONS. And this is my point... NOTHING in the story yet tells me that the driver was "trapped" in his car with no way to DRIVE away and leave the scene INSTEAD OF GETTING OUT OF THE CAR. GIVEN THE OPTION OF LEAVING THE SCENE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE WISER THING TO DO--- Now, if he was UNABLE to leave the scene/area, I agree with the other options.
    Does your state have a duty to retreat, or castle doctrine? I'm trying to understand where you are coming from here.

    Leaving isn't always the right thing, or the safest thing to do.

    Earlier this summer, I was in a situation with an angry driver, I tried leaving at first, he chased me, after 1/2 mile, I let him pass, hoping that would satisfy his ego, but he just stopped in front of me in the middle of the road. I was hoping he would do that, as it gave me the advantage. We bickered a little, and I was able to disappear before he got back in his car to chase again. He never knew I was armed, I kept that to myself, but it was nice to have the upper hand. Leaving isn't always an option.
    Last edited by stainless1911; 11-09-2010 at 08:23 PM.

  22. #22
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Does your state have a duty to retreat, or castle doctrine? I'm trying to understand where you are coming from here.

    Leaving isn't always the right thing, or the safest thing to do.

    Earlier this summer, I was in a situation with an angry driver, I tried leaving at first, he chased me, after 1/2 mile, I let him pass, hoping that would satisfy his ego, but he just stopped in front of me in the middle of the road. I was hoping he would do that, as it gave me the advantage. We bickered a little, and I was able to disappear before he got back in his car to chase again. He never knew I was armed, I kept that to myself, but it was nice to have the upper hand. Leaving isn't always an option.
    My state does NOT have a duty to retreat. In fact just the other day a 19 year old burglar was shot and killed by a homeowner as he was attempting to open the sliding glass door at the back of the home (homeowner shot through the glass). No charges have been filed against the homeowner as per statute he was 100% justified in his actions. Also, Utah law allows me to use any force needed up to and including force that may cause death to prevent a carjacking.
    I am just saying if it is possible to avoid the situation that may have been the wisest choice. Obviously, if someone is not going to let it go then you have to do what you have to do.

    My ONLY concern, and it wasn't that big to me (even though I was the one that used the word "blame") was to point out that IF he could have avoided the situation it may have been the wiser choice. Once the situtation has progressed where you have multiple potential assailants (some armed) then you have to do what you have to do--- and the prosecutor seems to be satisfied that this surviving driver WAS JUSTIFIED IN HIS ACTIONS.

    I am well aware of ones limited options to successfully defend oneself or others with you WHILE YOU ARE INSIDE YOUR VEHICLE. That being said, IF one successfully avoid the confrontation then you don't have to deal with all the other stuff, INCLUDING FORGIVING YOURSELF FOR ACTIONS TAKEN THAT WERE LEGALLY JUSTIFIED BUT RESULTED IN YOUR BEING FORCED TO TAKE ANOTHER'S LIFE.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Very well, but please don't shout.

  24. #24
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Very well, but please don't shout.
    Please understand I was not shouting.... but emphasizing!

Posting Permissions

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