• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

What would you do ? This is the worst thing I have ever seen ! You will be shocked

theoicarry

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
178
Location
baraboo, wisconsin
I did comment on the first post, reading more comments just leaves me to say, deadly force is warranted in a situation if someone is attacking you or others with a weapon, gun, bat, knife etc.. On another thought, none of us were there, you gotta be there and then you will know. I am still sick to my stomach.
 

Chap

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
213
Location
Greenville, MS
Simply standing over her would have stopped the fight

Every time the man was near her the attackers stopped. He was stupid and walked away then they would attack.

If I stood over the woman I would not use deadly force. I would tell them they are being recorded and to back away or I will defend her and myself. If they continue to attack I assure you they would be in the hospital. I'm not a cop or wear a cape but when did common decency disappear?

This is a good reason to have a level III holster. You need to protect yourself and your weapon until the situation becomes elevated.

I'm 5' 11" and a healthy 198 lbs so these two mad women (no offense to the female gender) are no threat to me. If they pull a weapon or more people join in where I'm uncomfortable and it elevates to a deadly force scenario, then it might be time to prepare to respond with deadly force. Each situation will be different.

I hope the victim is ok. I hope she gets a good lawyer.

YouTube has inspired people to do things they might not other wise do. I'm sure they knew they were being video recorded, I'm sure this provoked the situation. Probably hoped they would be on YouTube and get street credit for the attack. More people need to be prosecuted and have it posted on TV & YouTube so people can see what a bad idea it is.

Chap
 
Last edited:

1FASTC4

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
505
Location
Tomahawk
I did comment on the first post, reading more comments just leaves me to say, deadly force is warranted in a situation if someone is attacking you or others with a weapon, gun, bat, knife etc.. On another thought, none of us were there, you gotta be there and then you will know. I am still sick to my stomach.

No, actually. There's no requirement for a weapon being present. There's no mention of a weapon being required for deadly force to be justified.

Here's the Wisconsin law.

939.48 - ANNOT.
A person may employ deadly force against another, if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to protect a 3rd-person or one's self from imminent death or great bodily harm, without incurring civil liability for injury to the other. Clark v. Ziedonis, 513 F. 2d 79 (1975).

Wisconsin law defines great bodily harm as bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death, serious permanent disfigurement, or a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or other serious bodily injury.

The person in the video suffers great bodily harm.
 
Last edited:

comp45acp

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
383
Location
Watertown, WI, ,
Actually i believe you are incorrect here. You do NOT shoot except where deadly force is warranted. You should never fire off warning shots and you should never try to incapacitate someone with some one handed knee-cap shot. Firing a gun is using deadly force regardless of if the person dies or is injured. Whether or not you are "shooting to kill" or "shooting to stop" are philosophically irrelevant because you should ONLY be shooting (using deadly force) in a situation where you or someone else has also been presented with deadly force against them.

Civilians can legally use EQUAL or lesser force only, never greater. Police officers may use NECESSARY force, i.e. what they deem is necessary to stop the threat.

In this situation, regardless of the standard practice of using a firearm to protect yourself or someone else, I would draw and yell for them to stop and try to get their attention in hopes that they will see the firearm and run away. If they did not stop then i do feel a person would be justified in using deadly force against them to stop the attack. In my state of Maine you may use deadly force to stop the four following crimes: Murder, Arson, Rape and Kidnapping.

Four people against one person can easily be considered use of deadly force by the group. When you have a large number of people against a single person, the group becomes capable of deadly force regardless of if they are armed. In this case they beat her until she started to have seizures and this is a pretty clear sign that she is in danger of being crippled or even killed. Also in this situation because its males against a female, extra consideration is given to the female because she will statistically be physically smaller and weaker than the average male, this adds another level of danger.

If you sat back and called 911 and waited for police, her life would be in their hands. You really have no reason not to assume that this woman could be killed and for that reason i feel that deadly force would be justified. I would not fire a warning shot but i would try and draw their attention and hopefully frighten them away with the presence of the gun but this is risky because what if they have guns? A lot of people wouldnt agree with an attempt to scare them away but situationally thats what i would be comfortable with.

Who mentioned anything about "warning shots"? I said you shoot only to stop the threat. You do not shoot to kill someone. They may die, we don't know. Many of you are making the case for those that want mandatory training and you don't realize it.
 

1FASTC4

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
505
Location
Tomahawk
Many of you are making the case for those that want mandatory training and you don't realize it.

Really? Tell me about all the times you've used deadly force in self defense. Tell me about all the court cases you've tried regarding deadly force. Let's hear all about your expertise on the subject. I posted the law, you've posted jack.
 
Last edited:

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
Who mentioned anything about "warning shots"? I said you shoot only to stop the threat. You do not shoot to kill someone. They may die, we don't know. Many of you are making the case for those that want mandatory training and you don't realize it.

Claytron is a Holier than thou ,Elitist TROLL from Maine..Just ignore him....
 

G Man

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
12
Location
Colorao Springs, CO
This just proves my point. If you have a firearm in possesion and beat the **** out of an attacker with your bare hands, it should lean more towards defense. Now when you pull out your firearm and start lobbing rounds and dropping bodies, this looks a little more like a trigger happy vigilante in the eyes of the law. I have never laid hands on a woman in my life however, this situation would have had a justifiable cause.

What I myself would have done? I would have pushed both of the women into the bathroom and shut the door putting my foot at the bottom. This would seperate the two parties and make it nearly impossible for them to escape from the restroom. I would then call the police and let them know I was detaining two suspects who just brutally assaulted a woman. I'm pretty sure this would have the women in cuffs and the situation under control a lot faster then trying to play john wayne.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
1FASTC4 said:
Ya a transgender... who used the wrong bathroom? (a rumor I read somewhere)
Which still doesn't excuse the attack,
nor does it excuse the apathy of the bystanders.
Apathy? How about ghoulish enjoyment. Schadenfreude [sp?] without the guilt.
Shows how low they are, and says bad things about society that nobody there stopped the attack.
 

1FASTC4

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
505
Location
Tomahawk
Which still doesn't excuse the attack,
nor does it excuse the apathy of the bystanders.
Apathy? How about ghoulish enjoyment. Schadenfreude [sp?] without the guilt.
Shows how low they are, and says bad things about society that nobody there stopped the attack.

Oh I agree. I didn't mean to imply the gender of the victim in any way mitigated the seriousness of the assault.
 
Last edited:

Claytron

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
402
Location
Maine
Claytron is a Holier than thou ,Elitist TROLL from Maine..Just ignore him....

You are a childish loser who cant stand to see me say anything without getting his panties all twisted up. Holier than thou? Give me a break.
 

Claytron

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
402
Location
Maine
Who mentioned anything about "warning shots"? I said you shoot only to stop the threat. You do not shoot to kill someone. They may die, we don't know. Many of you are making the case for those that want mandatory training and you don't realize it.

nd you missed the main point of what i said regarding that comment. Philosophically its the same thing. When you shoot someone in self defense where do you shoot them? In the finger? the foot? asscheek? No, you shoot them in the most effective area which is centermass and nobody can reasonably argue that they didnt realize shooting someone centermass couldnt possibly kill them. what you are saying seems to just be semantics.
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
You are a childish loser who cant stand to see me say anything without getting his panties all twisted up. Holier than thou? Give me a break.

All you do is aggravate people with your know it all BS....go bug the people in your own state forum, no one here gives a flying dog poo about what you think.
 

Claytron

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
402
Location
Maine
All you do is aggravate people with your know it all BS....go bug the people in your own state forum, no one here gives a flying dog poo about what you think.

I guess thats better than aggravating people with your know-nothing BS. If you have such a problem with me why dont you save everyone else the trouble and just PM your crap to me?

Seriously, do you need to respond in every thread i do just to claim im a troll? Im adding my opinion, you are just being an *******.
 

Zeus

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
194
Location
Neenah
I cant help but notice that, most of the people with the strongest opinions seem to actually reside in areas, where events such as these are likely to take place. Of course I am just going by the profiles they list but I think when you live somewhere where you see this kind of sht every day, it affects your opinion greatly. Personally, I can't imagine ever being in this situation because if I stopped at a McD's and the clientele appeared to be of a certain demographic, I would promptly GTFO of there and go somewhere else.
I don't mean to imply anything racial but more so the probable education level and just general "ghetto" mentality these patrons would be likely to display. If they all had nice church clothes on or business attire and spoke with manners, I would feel much better about where I was at.
That being said, if I was there, I would have very authoritatively commanded them to stop. If no positive result came of that, at 6'3" 250 lbs (not bragging) I would probably have grabbed both assailants by the throat and clunked their fking heads together and threw them out the door. If they then presented weapons or persisted in any way (unlikely), I would have taken it to the next level.
I know this sounds like some macho BS but I have done it before to grown men and not only does it work but there is usually a moment of disbelief by the perps that someone actually just did that to them. Most people who attack like this only do it because they know they can beat the weaker opponent. A good knowledge of pressure points of the human body can be a very effective ally when dealing with folks such as these.
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
I guess thats better than aggravating people with your know-nothing BS. If you have such a problem with me why dont you save everyone else the trouble and just PM your crap to me?

Seriously, do you need to respond in every thread i do just to claim im a troll? Im adding my opinion, you are just being an *******.

When your being a TROLL I will....& since your always trolling ..I guess you will be seeing a lot of me when your visiting the Wisconsin Forum...I understand why you are here, since the Maine forum is probably as lame as you are..
 

Krusty

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
281
Location
Trempealeau County, Wisconsin
I watched 1/2 of the clip. That's about all I cared to watch. It's hard to really say what you as a bystander would actually do. Myself I believe I would tell them verbally to cease immediately followed by drawing the gun. If that didn't work, rather than outright killing them, taking out the legs would stop the assault. I know it would probably be better to kill the scum, but there is the legal ramifications getting in the way of good judgement.

And sorry to say, very few of us know the martial arts and lots of us are just too old. We are not Chuck Norris or David Carridine. If we were, we probably wouldn't feel the need to carry.
 
Top