OldMarksman
Staff
Has to do with criminal guilt only. And then there's the issue of civil liability. Entirely different. And that was the question at the start.
Are you responsible? [Part 1]
- Thread starter .22lr
- Start date
- Status
Glenn Bartley
New member
Matt,
I cannot answer your poll because none of the answers are acceptable to me nor do they necessarily reflect what responsibility anyone would have in a real life situation as you described.
You say this:
While that statement may make you feel good about yourself now, maybe you had best think about what you just said and how such an attitude could effect you in the event you ever accidentally shoot someone during a justified self defense (or defense of another) with an adversary. You have given yourself enough rope with which to hang yourself and so too has anyone else who agrees with you and answers likewise here.
The truth be told, you could accidentally shoot an innocent bystander during an otherwise justifiable armed confrontation with a bad guy and you could be found to be absolutely without financial liability toward the innocent party whom was shot. You could also be without any moral or ethical fault too.
First of all I will go with morals and ethics. You have no such responsibility as I see it (and yes your moral code may differ) if the shot that hit the bystander was beyond your control for any reason. There are a virtually endless amount of ways that such could take place. If you cannot figure hem out - well, I think you had better talk to an attorney, a clergyman, a psychologist, a judge, and a philosopher before you make a statement like that again. Mostly though - discuss it with a pragmatist who has been in such a situation as you describe and maybe speak to a few victims of such an accidental shooting too. This is not meant as rhetoric, I truly mean I think you need to discuss, debate, explore this matter in great depth before ever making such a statement about your moral responsibility again. It may save you an awful lot of grief if you ever wind up in such a predicament.
As for the financial end of it, or should I say the civil end of it - let the courts decide. Of course, if you want to say ahead of time that you are going to be wholly financially responsible should you ever be involved in such a mess, I have to warn you again to be careful of what you are saying. I also have to wonder and ask, respectfully, do you have any grasp of what you just said when you said you would be wholly responsible for any damage caused by any bullet that leaves your gun? You are courting, enticing, even begging for absolute financial destruction of yourself and maybe your family) by saying that, or you have no to little comprehension of what it means to be financially responsible, even in part let alone in whole, for any damage done.
First of all, it could be quite possible that the only reason your shot went astray and hit an innocent was because of an action taken by a third party (such as he bad guy, one of his accomplices, or even another innocent third party) and that you could not have reasonably avoided under the circumstances. If a third party is not at fault, consider this, it could be the fault of the innocent bystander you shot that said bystander was shot. Both types of situation should be easy to imagine especially since they do sometimes happen.
Just a brief example of each.
1) A bad guy tries to mug you, you draw and fire and hit him but he was already attacking and forward momentum has him on you and he struggles for several minutes before falling mortally wounded. As you struggle to retain your pistol, the bad guy shoves, pulls, punches, twists, or otherwise causes your body to make a movement whereby you squeeze off a shot (whether or not your finger was off the trigger during the struggle it wound up back on it because of the violent attack on you by the bad guy). The shot cripples and cause permanent complete disability to an innocent bystander who had just started a $250,000 a year job, and has a family of 4, a wife and three children. His wife was previously made permanently disabled but received no compensation for it. Are you telling me you are completely responsible financially for any damage the bullet that came out of your gun caused? If so, you are in big trouble if it ever happens to you.
2) What if, while you are shooting it out with a bad guy, someone (an innocent bystander) with reckless abandon runs in front of you just as you are shooting, and is screaming "please, please, make love not violence". Is there any chance that the innocent bystander (certainly innocent with regard to the shootout between you and the bad guy) might have some liability in such a case? Oh heck, let m slip in -another 2a) What if the innocent party mistook you for the bad guy and jumped on your arms and pushed the pistol down and it went off killing or severely injuring the innocent party. Is there any chance the innocent would be liable in any part in this situation?
I strongly recommend you reconsider answering the questions you asked with such absolute generalizations as to whether or not you or anyone would be liable.
Would you feel like crud if you shot someone. I can say, without a doubt that would be one of my emotions to one extent or another even if I gunned down Osama bin Laden - so yeah sure I would feel pretty badly if I shot an innocent party by mistake or accident or even because of someone else's fault. Would I be financially responsible? I would hire the best attorney I could afford and take my chances in court before hanging myself. As for morally, if it was an accident or by fault of someone else then again, I would feel like crud but I certainly do not think I would be morally responsible for anything. Of course neither outlook means I might not try to help the innocent victim either because of ethics or morals or because it would make me feel good.
All the best,
Glenn B
I cannot answer your poll because none of the answers are acceptable to me nor do they necessarily reflect what responsibility anyone would have in a real life situation as you described.
You say this:
While that statement may make you feel good about yourself now, maybe you had best think about what you just said and how such an attitude could effect you in the event you ever accidentally shoot someone during a justified self defense (or defense of another) with an adversary. You have given yourself enough rope with which to hang yourself and so too has anyone else who agrees with you and answers likewise here.
The truth be told, you could accidentally shoot an innocent bystander during an otherwise justifiable armed confrontation with a bad guy and you could be found to be absolutely without financial liability toward the innocent party whom was shot. You could also be without any moral or ethical fault too.
First of all I will go with morals and ethics. You have no such responsibility as I see it (and yes your moral code may differ) if the shot that hit the bystander was beyond your control for any reason. There are a virtually endless amount of ways that such could take place. If you cannot figure hem out - well, I think you had better talk to an attorney, a clergyman, a psychologist, a judge, and a philosopher before you make a statement like that again. Mostly though - discuss it with a pragmatist who has been in such a situation as you describe and maybe speak to a few victims of such an accidental shooting too. This is not meant as rhetoric, I truly mean I think you need to discuss, debate, explore this matter in great depth before ever making such a statement about your moral responsibility again. It may save you an awful lot of grief if you ever wind up in such a predicament.
As for the financial end of it, or should I say the civil end of it - let the courts decide. Of course, if you want to say ahead of time that you are going to be wholly financially responsible should you ever be involved in such a mess, I have to warn you again to be careful of what you are saying. I also have to wonder and ask, respectfully, do you have any grasp of what you just said when you said you would be wholly responsible for any damage caused by any bullet that leaves your gun? You are courting, enticing, even begging for absolute financial destruction of yourself and maybe your family) by saying that, or you have no to little comprehension of what it means to be financially responsible, even in part let alone in whole, for any damage done.
First of all, it could be quite possible that the only reason your shot went astray and hit an innocent was because of an action taken by a third party (such as he bad guy, one of his accomplices, or even another innocent third party) and that you could not have reasonably avoided under the circumstances. If a third party is not at fault, consider this, it could be the fault of the innocent bystander you shot that said bystander was shot. Both types of situation should be easy to imagine especially since they do sometimes happen.
Just a brief example of each.
1) A bad guy tries to mug you, you draw and fire and hit him but he was already attacking and forward momentum has him on you and he struggles for several minutes before falling mortally wounded. As you struggle to retain your pistol, the bad guy shoves, pulls, punches, twists, or otherwise causes your body to make a movement whereby you squeeze off a shot (whether or not your finger was off the trigger during the struggle it wound up back on it because of the violent attack on you by the bad guy). The shot cripples and cause permanent complete disability to an innocent bystander who had just started a $250,000 a year job, and has a family of 4, a wife and three children. His wife was previously made permanently disabled but received no compensation for it. Are you telling me you are completely responsible financially for any damage the bullet that came out of your gun caused? If so, you are in big trouble if it ever happens to you.
2) What if, while you are shooting it out with a bad guy, someone (an innocent bystander) with reckless abandon runs in front of you just as you are shooting, and is screaming "please, please, make love not violence". Is there any chance that the innocent bystander (certainly innocent with regard to the shootout between you and the bad guy) might have some liability in such a case? Oh heck, let m slip in -another 2a) What if the innocent party mistook you for the bad guy and jumped on your arms and pushed the pistol down and it went off killing or severely injuring the innocent party. Is there any chance the innocent would be liable in any part in this situation?
I strongly recommend you reconsider answering the questions you asked with such absolute generalizations as to whether or not you or anyone would be liable.
Would you feel like crud if you shot someone. I can say, without a doubt that would be one of my emotions to one extent or another even if I gunned down Osama bin Laden - so yeah sure I would feel pretty badly if I shot an innocent party by mistake or accident or even because of someone else's fault. Would I be financially responsible? I would hire the best attorney I could afford and take my chances in court before hanging myself. As for morally, if it was an accident or by fault of someone else then again, I would feel like crud but I certainly do not think I would be morally responsible for anything. Of course neither outlook means I might not try to help the innocent victim either because of ethics or morals or because it would make me feel good.
All the best,
Glenn B
Wildalaska
Moderator
Yep.....Under that factual scenario I could cogently argue several reasons for your negligence
Reductio ad absurdum
WildkeepyourguninyourholsterAlaska TM
RamSlammer
New member
Responsible for every bullet that leaves my gun. "Be sure of your target and what's behind it."
Too many "what ifs" here...
In the case of the round fired during a struggle, I would probably absolve the good guy (what the court does...
).
If the good guy could not reasonably see the innocent/know someone was there, they may be absolved.
In the classic "oops" flyer that hits poor Mrs. Smith....that's a tough one!
In the case of the round fired during a struggle, I would probably absolve the good guy (what the court does...
).If the good guy could not reasonably see the innocent/know someone was there, they may be absolved.
In the classic "oops" flyer that hits poor Mrs. Smith....that's a tough one!
DanThaMan1776
New member
i'm quite relieved that the overwhelming majority of us take full responsibility for every bullet that leaves our gun.
Unless I'm close enough that I can pretty near guarantee COM hits, under that kind of stress, then no, I will not fire. I'll scream like a girl and run like hell, and we'll see how good the bad guy is at hitting erratically moving targets. If there's no where to run (a corridor, a narrow alley), I'll run at the shooter and hope to choke the life out of him before I die.
Sorry Wild - I don't think so. I won't just run away if something like this takes place. If 4 guys approach me on a sidewalk and look like they are getting ready beat my brains in - I'll run if I can. Everyone has a limit to what they will run from and what they won't, I guess.
More to come.
All,
I promise that this is a multi-part thread. The other sections will deal with other topics, eventually leading to a conclusion thread. Some of the questions posed will be addressed, I just want to let this thread run a bit longer.
Thank you all for your inputs thus far. Please remember, this thread is for healthy discussion, and in no way should be taken as judgment nor should participants feel that there is a "right" response.
Once again, Thank you, i hope you all can participate in the next segment which I will get arround to posting soon if I can manage it in the lunch time I have left.
Very Respectfully,
~Matt
All,
I promise that this is a multi-part thread. The other sections will deal with other topics, eventually leading to a conclusion thread. Some of the questions posed will be addressed, I just want to let this thread run a bit longer.
Thank you all for your inputs thus far. Please remember, this thread is for healthy discussion, and in no way should be taken as judgment nor should participants feel that there is a "right" response.
Once again, Thank you, i hope you all can participate in the next segment which I will get arround to posting soon if I can manage it in the lunch time I have left.
Very Respectfully,
~Matt
Wildalaska
Moderator
More reductio ad absurdum
WildkeepinmindthechoicefactorAlaska ™
Blue Steel
New member
What moral and financial responsibility does the attacker have for parties injured as a result of violence used to stop his commission of a serious crime?
A question based on the potential reality of having to make the decision to return fire to save your skin when there is a high possibility of hitting an innocent is absurd? In a thread asking if you are responsible for the damage caused. Come on Wild if you don't want to answer the hard ones then don't. Just don't try to trivialize the question because you won't answer it.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Answering it would give it the credibility it doesnt deserve
But here, I'll do it anyway to give it the WA imprimatur of worthiness:
You answered your own question. See my Trademarked closing sig in my reply above and below.
WildchoicechoicechoiceAlaska ™
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
WildAlaska said:
BillCA said:
These are your answers right here.
Clear and concise. You have the moral responsibility to:
1)Not shoot someone unless you are left with no other options.
2)Make every effort to not hurt anyone except the criminal(s) who make firing necessary.
If (1) and (2) then the person(s) who are responsible for any damage of any kind are the criminals.
OldMarksman
Staff
If one kills or injures someone other than an attacker during a self-defense shooting or another justified use of deadly force (say, to defend a third person, or to prevent a forcible felony), the original perpetrator will bear the responsibility for any criminal charges except to the extent that the shooter's intentional reckless disregard for known risks resulted in said harm; rapidly firing a magazine load of unaimed shots in the direction of a crowd, without regard for the safety of the crowd, for example, could conceivably result in charges of criminal negligence, or involuntary manslaughter. The burden of proof on the state is beyond reasonable doubt. So I have been responsibly advised. Do not rely on this as legal advice.
The burden regarding financial responsibility for civil damages is something else again. Failure to abide by "reasonable standards of caution" can result in liability. The burden of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence." That's a much lower threshold.
Who bears the potential civil responsibility? Anyone involved, including the criminal, the justified shooter including LEOs and their departments, and maybe even the property owner, depending upon the circumstances..
What is considered reasonable enters into both questions. It is important to remember that those who will decide what is reasonable will do so under jury instructions applicable to the jurisdiction, and one can be virtually certain that few or none of them will be persons of the kind who have been posting here.
The burden regarding financial responsibility for civil damages is something else again. Failure to abide by "reasonable standards of caution" can result in liability. The burden of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence." That's a much lower threshold.
Who bears the potential civil responsibility? Anyone involved, including the criminal, the justified shooter including LEOs and their departments, and maybe even the property owner, depending upon the circumstances..
What is considered reasonable enters into both questions. It is important to remember that those who will decide what is reasonable will do so under jury instructions applicable to the jurisdiction, and one can be virtually certain that few or none of them will be persons of the kind who have been posting here.
There is a case in MI in which this very thing happened. A man was carjacked, the carjacker attempted to drive away and crashed the vehicle. The carjacker then exited the vehicle and attempted to flee and the victim fired two shots at him. One of those shots entered a home and struck a woman in the chest, killing her. The prosecution initially charged the carjacker with the death of the woman even though the guy who got carjacked admitted to firing the shots. A few weeks later the guy who fired the shots is now charged with manslaughter and firing his weapon at a building. The carjacker is still being charged with felony murder.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/23532106/detail.html
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/23532106/detail.html
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Sefner, thank you for posting this story. Actual examples are good.
I'd point out, though, that this wasn't actually a case of a justified self-defense shooting:
But the basic point is the same: If you make the decision to shoot, justified or not, you are responsible for the results of your shooting.
I'd point out, though, that this wasn't actually a case of a justified self-defense shooting:
If the carjacker was attempting to flee, the immediate threat to the victim was over. The "jackee" may well have been charged even if he had hit the suspect and not shot anyone else.Sefner said:
But the basic point is the same: If you make the decision to shoot, justified or not, you are responsible for the results of your shooting.
- Status