ocholsteroc
Regular Member
Yes the po-po could come and shoot at you for having a gun on, in the middle of night after a call of shots fired. Plus those bullets could come at you, I would be hiding in my house.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
So there I was... (shots fired.. Holland Road in Virginia Beach)
- Thread starter MagiK_SacK
- Start date
Yes the po-po could come and shoot at you for having a gun on, in the middle of night after a call of shots fired. Plus those bullets could come at you, I would be hiding in my house.
It depends on if the other fellow fit the Virginia "He needed Killing" exemption:monkey
First, you have to give it the legal test:
1.Did I know him?
2.If yes. did I like him?
3.If the answer to 1 was no, would I have liked him if I did know him?
4. Did he owe me any money?
That concludes the first part.
Part 2. Does he need killing or just a good beating?
That concludes the entire legal test and you can proceed.
Last edited:
Taking responsiblility for your own protection comes to mind. NOT relying upon someone paid (poorly) to respond to problems. Granted, going outside may be an issue, but it is his right to do so and thus maintain his families security as he sees fit.
MagiK_SacK
Regular Member
This draws me to the explanation that Ed had put out during the discussion of 'Castle Doctrine' and this is it. Mind you it has been shortened to remove the less relavent Castle Doctrine information.
Being as I was not part of the problem and I feared death OR grievous bodily injury for my family and neighbors. I feel I wouldn't have been in the wrong had the situation arose that would have required me to use deadly force. As stated before I was not out there looking for a fight nor was I running around with my gun in my hand pointing it at every noise I heard. I had my gun concealed as to not cause any problems when the police showed up. I just wanted to know that the threat had passed and if it had not have had the option to stop the threat before reaching my house.
Thankfully I have a CHP which would allow me to conceal my gun to avoid this scenario. I am not stupid enough to have my wife call 911 due to gun fire and run outside OC or with gun in hand, thanks!
It's nice to know that there are people out there who understand that how people respond when the need to protect family arises and varies from person to person. Thank you.
Last edited:
ProShooter
Regular Member
Ok, I'll make this easy. I'm sure that some of our venerable lawyer types will be along to correct me if I've missed anything...
You may use force, up to and including deadly force if you reasonably believe that there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to yourself, or another innocent person; provided that you are in a place that you are legally allowed to be, and you are not the one who caused the problem......
A reasonable person, under the circumstances you described, would call 911 and hunker down in their house. They would not arm themselves, and wander out in to an area which was just riddled with gunfire. That tells me that you are not in fear, and in my non-lawyer opinion, I think you lose the protection of the "reasonable man theory". Me thinks a jury would say that you went looking for trouble....
another question that bears asking of the OP...
is your spouse or any other member of your family competent with a defensive firearm?
if not, then how about the following scenario to counter the comment about wanting to go outside to address any threat farther away from other family members:
- you're awakened hearing what you believe is gunfire
- you arm up and head outside to check things out while defenseless spouse dials 911 and hunkers down with kids
- BLAMMMO! you get shot and are unable to protect anyone, let alone your defenseless family
- bad guy sees you're down and decides to be a bad guy some more *inside* your house
if one of the other members of the family is firearms-knowledgable and comfortable, then feel free to disregard if you want, otherwise, still think it was a good idea to go outside?
:uhoh:
is your spouse or any other member of your family competent with a defensive firearm?
if not, then how about the following scenario to counter the comment about wanting to go outside to address any threat farther away from other family members:
- you're awakened hearing what you believe is gunfire
- you arm up and head outside to check things out while defenseless spouse dials 911 and hunkers down with kids
- BLAMMMO! you get shot and are unable to protect anyone, let alone your defenseless family
- bad guy sees you're down and decides to be a bad guy some more *inside* your house
if one of the other members of the family is firearms-knowledgable and comfortable, then feel free to disregard if you want, otherwise, still think it was a good idea to go outside?
:uhoh:
MagiK_SacK
Regular Member
OK, I can honestly say that I understand where you are coming from in your explanation. Where I am coming from, given it might be difficult to prove to a jury, I was not looking to hunt down anybody. The way I see it and feel about it with every part of my being is that my family comes first. If the threat were to return and make its way to my house I feel less able to protect my family in the confines of my house. I feel more enabled to protect my family when they are 'hunkered down' and I am on the "front lines" so to speak. Call me crazy but that is the way I was raised. Get your loved ones safe first then take care of the threat. I stress it again, I was not looking for a fight, and I felt the threat had passed. I merely took a position that I felt more comfortable to protect my family from IF the threat were to return. I had decided to fully assess the situation while I was outside (i.e. looking to bullet holes and so forth) because I felt it was safe to do so. As well, I also stated I did so cautiously and always aware of my surroundings. When a car was coming I made sure I was out of sight and so forth. As most have stated before and I feel the same way is that you can call the police all you want but the time it takes for them to show up is always an unknown factor. From what I can recall from the time my wife called to the time the police showed was about 10-15 minutes. A LOT can happen in that amount of time, and my decisions where exactly that MY decisions. They may not be what you would have done and that is understandable. They were MY choices, if you don't agree fine. Only I am accountable for my actions, and I would be willing to take full accountability for my actions if need be.
Something about the way you described the VA case law bothers me. You said "A reasonable person, under the circumstances you described, would call 911 and hunker down in their house.". What and where is reasonable person defined?
MagiK_SacK
Regular Member
ocholsteroc
Regular Member
half_life1052
Regular Member
Oh shes got one of those "aimbots"
First rule of survival- If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.
paramedic70002
Regular Member
Several years ago my Mom called me and told me someone had just tried to kick in her front door. She had no firearms in the home. She had recently has some issues with my step-brother, who lived about a half mile away, and had his own issues with prescription painkillers and his wife leaving him, so she thought it might have been him. She had not called 911. She lived outside a small village in the middle of nowhere (Isle of Wight County, Walters area), and LEO response for that area usually is poor. They spend most of their time on the "busy" end of the county, which makes sense when you have limited resources, but it does leave the "southerners" at a distinct disadvantage when bad things happen. Anyway, I told her I was on the way, that I would call 911, got dressed, grabbed my Mossberg 500 in addition to my sidearm, and took off from about 15 minutes away (City of Franklin). When I called 911, I advised them that I was responding, that I was armed, and what I was wearing and driving. Turns out I ran up behind the Deputy about a half mile from there, he was driving under the speed limit checking addresses. We pulled in together. I advised him who I was, I went left and he went right. We found no one outside and Mom was fine. Never a word was said about my weapons. Now, this was not the same scenario that the OP had, but the carry away point is that if you're outside (especially armed) and are expecting LEOs, you or your 911 caller should provide this information to the dispatcher. That was the night I convinced Mom to keep my 38, and to shoot anyone coming in the door. It didn't take much convincing either, even though on many other occasions she refused to even touch it or entertain the idea of shooting it. And my step-brother is currently in the pen after shooting up his GF's house and taking a pot shot at a Deputy in Southampton, I'm pretty sure in a failed suicide-by-cop.
ryan7068
Regular Member
Putting yourself in harms way.
I know that if I heard gun fire in close proximity to my residence, The first thing I would do is call 911. While the police aren't always the brightest, they are sure to have firearms and may even know how to shoot straight.
I personally get along with my neighbors and would hope if I was in trouble and they had the ability, would come back me up instead of just hiding inside. In anycase, I would holster a firearm quickly and proceed cautiously to determine the nature of the encounter. Unless you had previously encountered the assailant, there is no way the police could claim you were the agressor. I would be a legally armed citizen on a friends property just checking to ensure his safety. God forbid I encounter a criminal with a firearm and have to shoot. On a strong note, I would potentially have the element of surprise which can be a great advantage.
**Just my two cents**
I know that if I heard gun fire in close proximity to my residence, The first thing I would do is call 911. While the police aren't always the brightest, they are sure to have firearms and may even know how to shoot straight.
I personally get along with my neighbors and would hope if I was in trouble and they had the ability, would come back me up instead of just hiding inside. In anycase, I would holster a firearm quickly and proceed cautiously to determine the nature of the encounter. Unless you had previously encountered the assailant, there is no way the police could claim you were the agressor. I would be a legally armed citizen on a friends property just checking to ensure his safety. God forbid I encounter a criminal with a firearm and have to shoot. On a strong note, I would potentially have the element of surprise which can be a great advantage.
**Just my two cents**
MagiK_SacK
Regular Member
So I quote this again for what I would call reasonable doubt to your theory. By my count there are 2 people plus myself who would not have a problem going outside under the given circumstances, 2 people who say bad idea, and three who sound like they would not call it a problem but may not do it themselves. Let me make sure it is clear that the last three sound like they wouldn't have a problem with it, not that they would definitely do the same. So it seams like to me that given the response from everybody who has weighed in so far, my course of action wouldn't necessarily be considered 'unreasonable'. That judgment is of course made on the small number of responses. Even if the masses do feel different, does that make those and myself who may feel the same way I do 'unreasonable'? I would like to believe not without first seeing a no joke legal definition of 'reasonable man'. I know I am not speaking in legalese and am only speaking from what I see as logic when it comes to the term of 'reasonable man'. As we all know the difference in logic and legalese can be quite the difference. Just sayin where I am coming from....
ryan7068
Regular Member
Sea lawyer here!ARRRRRRR!
While not being a actual lawyer, I wouldn't presume to give legal advice. And I don't know how sure I am that my fellow man and I would agree that my previous stated actions would be reasonable. I would say that from testimony given by others in past defensive situations, cops may try to insnare you by you not taking other measures to defend yourself such as falling back or running. My response to that is if I am somewhere I have every right being, Im not breaking the law, and I am checking on the welfare of another human being, then there is no reason I shouldn't be able to move forward until a threat other than noise (gunfire) presents itself.......such as an armed individual acting toward me in an agressive manner/attempting to harm or kill me.
If I know Im willing to roll the dice with the legal system to defend my own life, then there is no reason not to extend that thought process to my fellow man and friend. Indifference can be just as bad as doing the deed yourself, if you reasonably had the power to do something. .....again just my opinion.
While not being a actual lawyer, I wouldn't presume to give legal advice. And I don't know how sure I am that my fellow man and I would agree that my previous stated actions would be reasonable. I would say that from testimony given by others in past defensive situations, cops may try to insnare you by you not taking other measures to defend yourself such as falling back or running. My response to that is if I am somewhere I have every right being, Im not breaking the law, and I am checking on the welfare of another human being, then there is no reason I shouldn't be able to move forward until a threat other than noise (gunfire) presents itself.......such as an armed individual acting toward me in an agressive manner/attempting to harm or kill me.
If I know Im willing to roll the dice with the legal system to defend my own life, then there is no reason not to extend that thought process to my fellow man and friend. Indifference can be just as bad as doing the deed yourself, if you reasonably had the power to do something. .....again just my opinion.
Last edited:
MagiK_SacK
Regular Member
+1 Well stated.
I think the underlined section captures better how I feel. I have always said I am no good with words, which would add fuel the the fire you point out about "cops may try to insnare you by you not taking other measures to defend yourself such as falling back or running". Thank goodness I have watched 'Don't talk to the Cops'. Let's just hope I actually learned something from it, lol.
I would tend to agree with this, if you're in your house and somebody starts shooting into the house from the outside your chances of being able to shoot back effectively are not as good as if you where able to see them, then again the attacker also has a higher chance of shooting somebody they can see. But what if you neighbor had just be shot outside, and the attacker was then preparing to enter his house to shoot his family? Most of my close neighbors do not own guns, but many of them have small children. If I heard gunshots right outside I would check on my family and ensure 911 was called, then look outside and determine what I thought was the best course of action at that point. I also would rather risk legal issues than live the rest of my life knowing that people where murdered when I could have possibly done something about it.
ryan7068
Regular Member
§ 19.2-100. Arrest without warrant.
The arrest of a person may be lawfully made also by any peace officer or private person without a warrant upon reasonable information that the accused stands charged in the courts of a state with a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. But when so arrested the accused shall be taken before a judge, magistrate or other officer authorized to issue criminal warrants in this Commonwealth with all practicable speed and complaint made against him under oath setting forth the ground for the arrest as in the preceding section; and thereafter his answer shall be heard as if he had been arrested on a warrant.
This might be a means of allowing you to check on the family. Just say the man had commited a felony and you were going to detain him until the police showed up
Crime:Pointing a firearm at me.
Punishable by death :shocker:
The arrest of a person may be lawfully made also by any peace officer or private person without a warrant upon reasonable information that the accused stands charged in the courts of a state with a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. But when so arrested the accused shall be taken before a judge, magistrate or other officer authorized to issue criminal warrants in this Commonwealth with all practicable speed and complaint made against him under oath setting forth the ground for the arrest as in the preceding section; and thereafter his answer shall be heard as if he had been arrested on a warrant.
This might be a means of allowing you to check on the family. Just say the man had commited a felony and you were going to detain him until the police showed up
Crime:Pointing a firearm at me.
Punishable by death :shocker:
Last edited: