i open carry!..........because im crazy???

[Hendu024]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

jay75009 wrote:

well Maine for one has a good semaritain law, stating that you are free from legal suit or arrest for aiding someone whos life is in danger, the swing side of it is that if you witness a murder or vicious beating and stand ther to watch instead of trying to aid the person or save their life, you are often held as an accomplice to the crime because crimes seem to have become a spectator sport.

I'm pretty sure the good semaritan laws do not allow a person to be charged as an accomplice to a crime, simply for witnessing it. Do you have any examples of this? It seems to me this was in a Seinfeld episode.

I believe some countries have a"duty to rescue" concept that might work this way.

That's kinda what I was thinking.

 

[jay75009]

imported post

N6ATF wrote:

buster81 wrote:

jay75009 wrote:

well Maine for one has a good semaritain law, stating that you are free from legal suit or arrest for aiding someone whos life is in danger, the swing side of it is that if you witness a murder or vicious beating and stand ther to watch instead of trying to aid the person or save their life, you are often held as an accomplice to the crime because crimes seem to have become a spectator sport.

I'm pretty sure the good semaritan laws do not allow a person to be charged as an accomplice to a crime, simply for witnessing it. Do you have any examples of this? It seems to me this was in a Seinfeld episode.

I believe some countries have a"duty to rescue" concept that might work this way.

Off the top of my head, some states penalize spectators of street racing... http://www.popcenter.org/problems/street_racing/3

exactly its based off the same theory that if you are with a friend, and the friend kills someone and you do not immideately report it, you are charged with 2nd degree manslaughter as an accomplice to the murder. i witnessed from a 6th floor window,a kid get beaten by a street gang so badly he ended up in ICU for 8 months, once they started i was on my way down the stairs to intervien.........but at teh same time a hunter was removing his double barrel from his truck, saw the attack, but the shotgun backc and just watched this poor 14yo get his brains stomped out, by the time i got down there, gang had dispersed. but when the police aremrived and took witness statements, they arrested the hunter immideately for failing to aid a child in trouble under that law. just as if you are certified in CRP and dont attempt to assist a drowning victem, you are held accountable........its kinda messed up.



I dont believe it means ANYONE has to help someone, i think *wich i believe its really up to the interpertation of the LEO" but someone who has the immediate means to assist a person in distress has the responsibility in this state to do so.

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

 

[okboomer]

imported post

protias wrote:

lol, awesome story.

However, if I saw her running towards me, I probably would have assumed a defensive stance and my hand going towards my firearm.

I did, that is why the "report" made at the PD. And I am the female in the story, "he" was the aggressor. It was funny when the detective called the male neighbor a chickensh*t.

 

[protias]

imported post

okboomer wrote:

protias wrote:

lol, awesome story.

However, if I saw her running towards me, I probably would have assumed a defensive stance and my hand going towards my firearm.

I did, that is why the "report" made at the PD. And I am the female in the story, "he" was the aggressor. It was funny when the detective called the male neighbor a chickensh*t.

Sorry, my brain didn't read your original post correctly. And lol at the detective's description.

 

[okboomer]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

I dont believe it means ANYONE has to help someone, i think *wich i believe its really up to the interpertation of the LEO" but someone who has the immediate means to assist a person in distress has the responsibility in this state to do so.

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

Well, folks, I believe this is the crux of the matter: our society has gone from personal responsibility (up to 1950's) to a society of permissivness based on "childhood trauma" excusing irresponsible and/or criminal behavior. The Police motto, "To Serve and Protect" seems to have morphed into something resembling the OCP from RoboCop.

When did "we the people" lose our competenceto manage our personal safety?

 

[buster81]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

N6ATF wrote:

buster81 wrote:

jay75009 wrote:

well Maine for one has a good semaritain law, stating that you are free from legal suit or arrest for aiding someone whos life is in danger, the swing side of it is that if you witness a murder or vicious beating and stand ther to watch instead of trying to aid the person or save their life, you are often held as an accomplice to the crime because crimes seem to have become a spectator sport.

I'm pretty sure the good semaritan laws do not allow a person to be charged as an accomplice to a crime, simply for witnessing it. Do you have any examples of this? It seems to me this was in a Seinfeld episode.

I believe some countries have a"duty to rescue" concept that might work this way.

Off the top of my head, some states penalize spectators of street racing... http://www.popcenter.org/problems/street_racing/3

exactly its based off the same theory that if you are with a friend, and the friend kills someone and you do not immideately report it, you are charged with 2nd degree manslaughter as an accomplice to the murder. i witnessed from a 6th floor window,a kid get beaten by a street gang so badly he ended up in ICU for 8 months, once they started i was on my way down the stairs to intervien.........but at teh same time a hunter was removing his double barrel from his truck, saw the attack, but the shotgun backc and just watched this poor 14yo get his brains stomped out, by the time i got down there, gang had dispersed. but when the police aremrived and took witness statements, they arrested the hunter immideately for failing to aid a child in trouble under that law. just as if you are certified in CRP and dont attempt to assist a drowning victem, you are held accountable........its kinda messed up.



I dont believe it means ANYONE has to help someone, i think *wich i believe its really up to the interpertation of the LEO" but someone who has the immediate means to assist a person in distress has the responsibility in this state to do so.

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

The bolded part of your last post might be adifferent situation.

In the case of you being with a friend while he commits murder, you may actually be an accomplice to his crime and be charged. You also might not be convicted.

In the case where I amwalking through a parking lot andsee someone (unknown to me)in the process of murderinganother person, I cannot say what I would do because the variables are endless. However, if the situation calls for my response to be finding my exit and ensuring my own (and possibly my families)safety, that is what I will do.When I'm safe, I'll call the police. I'm skeptical thatyou are goingtofind a law that makes me liable,but I could be wrong.

Here is what I could find:

http://definitions.uslegal.com/g/good-samaritans/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

 

[The Wolfhound]

imported post

First, let me say to you and any other service members reading this: Thank-you for your service to me and our country. I have gotten very good taking fast pictures with my cell phone camera. Outside of the courthouse, I do not go anywhere where it cannot go, unlike my pistol. When no bodily harm is in the equation, it is still a great deterent. And who knows, it might make a great youtube video.

 

[buster81]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

Any luck with this?

 

[4angrybadgers]

imported post

buster81 wrote:

jay75009 wrote:

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

Any luck with this?

I doubt he found it. Buster, you were correct in your earlier post. jay75009 is crossing two separate concepts in his thinking.

Being an accomplice to a crime is illegal, and I'm sure the example given (standing by watching while your friend kills someone, and failing to report it) is illegal anywhere.

However, "Good Samaritan" laws do not require someone to render aid to another. They exist to protect a Good Samaritan from liability for services rendered in good faith to an injured person. As I pointed out when someone else posted the same falsehood here: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=32847&forum_id=7&jump_to=589564#p589564

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

snip........
Actively Enlisted United States Marine............. I AM a graduate of the Frontsight Training Institute and MANY other Tactical Training Institutes.

What is "actively enlisted" - active duty? Where are you currently stationed and how does that work with your professed job as a security guard?

When did you attend FrontSight and what other elite schools do you claim on your resume?

Some things just don't add up for me. Can you clarify?

Yata hey

 

[jay75009]

imported post

for anyone else sure........for you.........nope

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

for anyone else sure........for you.........nope

No more than was expected - your reputation is intact. :lol:

Yata hey

 

[jay75009]

imported post

my reputation for you and as someone else put it your "i run this attitude.........yes you are correct that is intact. this is the last message of yours i will even acknowledge. im done with dropping to your level for pointless arguments and insults. have a good day sir

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

jay75009 wrote:

my reputation for you and as someone else put it your "i run this attitude.........yes you are correct that is intact. this is the last message of yours i will even acknowledge. im done with dropping to your level for pointless arguments and insults. have a good day sir

Having been asked for substantiation of claims, particularly making extremely contradictory statements, seems to have generated a great deal of animosity on your part.

Misquoting laws, not responding to requests for cites, giving faulty or misleading information and then responding with a surly attitude when called to task, is less than the readers of this forum deserve.

This is about responsibility, veracity and proper conduct. I'm sorry that you don't see it that way.

Yata hey

 

[buster81]

imported post

4angrybadgers wrote:

buster81 wrote:

jay75009 wrote:

im gonna look up the actual wording and classification of the law and post it later

Any luck with this?

I doubt he found it. Buster, you were correct in your earlier post. jay75009 is crossing two separate concepts in his thinking.

I know, but he seemed pretty convinced that we (gun carriers) are morally and legally obligated to help others. I thought after a month and a half of searching for this law, he might have come up with something.

 

[4angrybadgers]

imported post

Jay, I read back and saw your post where you said that Maine's Good Samaritan law required people to assist (earlier I missed the exact state you were referring to). Guess what - 5 seconds and the first link in a Google search for "maine good samaritan law" proved you wrong. The title of the statute says it all...

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/Statutes/14/title14sec164.html

Title 14: COURT PROCEDURE -- CIVIL
Part 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
Chapter 7: DEFENSES GENERALLY
§164. Immunity from civil liability

Notwithstanding any inconsistent provisions of any public or private and special law, any person who voluntarily, without the expectation of monetary or other compensation from the person aided or treated, renders first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance to a person who is unconscious, ill, injured or in need of rescue assistance, shall not be liable for damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by such person nor for damages for the death of such person alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of such first aid, emergency treatment or rescue assistance, unless it is established that such injuries or such death were caused willfully, wantonly or recklessly or by gross negligence on the part of such person. This section shall apply to members or employees of nonprofit volunteer or governmental ambulance, rescue or emergency units, whether or not a user or service fee may be charged by the nonprofit unit or the governmental entity and whether or not the members or employees receive salaries or other compensation from the nonprofit unit or the governmental entity. This section shall not be construed to require a person who is ill or injured to be administered first aid or emergency treatment if such person objects thereto on religious grounds. This section shall not apply if such first aid or emergency treatment or assistance is rendered on the premises of a hospital or clinic.

Might want to quit being so belligerent without doing even the slightest modicum of due diligence on your own claims... :quirky

 

[McX]

imported post

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

McX wrote:

I OC because THEY are all crazy!:what:

:lol: :exclaim:

Yata hey

 

[Mjollnir]

imported post

Jay, I'm sorry for your loss at such a young age.

I do not mean to offend anyone. I only want to point out that the rules of engagement must be met beforeI will draw my weapon. I will do so todefend theinnocent, regardless of religious belief, race, gender, sexual orientation, unpreparedness, ignorance, etc., etc.I probably won't have time to ask. I believe it's my duty to help if I can. When my philosophical friend pointed out that the police were created to protect the rich from the poor, I knew I had to take steps to assure my own well being and that of my family's.We don't have much in the way of things or money, just a wealth of love.

I choose to be proactive. Some may choose not to be. My family extends to my community. I don't know everyone in my "family".

That said, Ijoined your forumto share an article about the failings of "May Issue" vs. "Shall Issue". It's called, Be a Good Victim. It's revelance here is that even the police should back down in situations and observe while they wait for more officers. It just depends on the situation when to engage and when not to. It's also relevant to the arguement for self reliance.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10691

I plan on carrying concealed even though I don't have to in Minnesota. First, tactically, I want the element of surprise. Second, I fear being ambushed and my firearm stolen. (Which would compel me to have to carry a back-up, which is probably a good idea anyway, but not always practical.) Third, I don't want to startle the sheep and bring unwanted police attention to myself.

Perhaps I would be more inclined to carry openly if I had an armed friend with me.

Not a popular stance on this site, but hey. Convince me to Open Carry. I'm open to your arguements.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Mjollnir wrote:

snip.......

I plan on carrying concealed even though I don't have to in Minnesota. First, tactically, I want the element of surprise. Second, I fear being ambushed and my firearm stolen. (Which would compel me to have to carry a back-up, which is probably a good idea anyway, but not always practical.) Third, I don't want to startle the sheep and bring unwanted police attention to myself.

Perhaps I would be more inclined to carry openly if I had an armed friend with me.

Not a popular stance on this site, but hey. Convince me to Open Carry. I'm open to your arguements.

Welcome to OCDO.

No argument between OC and CC. The most important thing is to carry responsibly.

OC is tactically sound, educates the public, deters crime on person, is somewhat politically motivated. All newbies have a case of the jitters - everybody is looking at me type of thing. It will pass - find and meet up with others in your area and go to lunch or dinner together. Stay here and read of positive experiences of others.

We do have a few kooks here and there - you'll learn to ignore them - separate the wheat from the chaff.


As to tactically sound, we have a long standing challenge to the detractors of OC.

Show me one (1) documented, confirmed (W/cite) incident where an OCer (non-LEO or military) was ever preemptively taken out in modern times anywhere in these United States. No one has ever been able to do so.

Further, If ever one such gun grab and resulting injury/death ever does occur (it will likely someday) the resultant percentage ratio will look something like .00001%

Best initial advice anyone can give you is buy a good retentive holster, know the laws and be a reasonable and responsible person.

If you ever get to Va. let me know - we'll show you how normal OC can be.
Used to spend my summers north of Cook, Minnesota in that beautiful lake country.

Yata hey