Defending 3rd party against stranger vs known person

That may be true, Erik, in theory. But the fact still remains that if you come in in the middle of something, you may not know enough about what has happened to know who you could legitimately help. And AFAIK, in most jurisdictions you don't even get a reasonable mistake. If you take the wrong side, you will be in trouble.
 
Shorts... ever consider keeping a baseball hat handy or even a frying pan for that matter? One good wallop upside the head ought to stop the attack. If you know this trouble maker is likely to be present at a family function, seriously consider bringing less than lethal defense.

An adopted cousin of mine is bi-polar, but he is pretty good about taking his meds. He is a pretty big guy and I would not want to tangle with him. If he was beating someone else to a pulp, I would defiantely find something to knock his butt out. Hopefully he would be too preoccupied with his human punching bag to notice me about to turn his lights out! I don't think my aunt and uncle in law would appreciate me adding any extra holes to their son.
 
The entire scenario is one which we must all think about even if we never face it, . . . remembering that every perpetrator of evil deeds is someone's sister, brother, aunt, uncle, son, daughter, etc, . . . and it may some day be our turn in the bucket to have a relative do something less than honorable.

I would probably be like most, . . . more prone to doing something non lethal, but only if it looked like it might succeed, . . . and if the knowledge of the person would give me reason to believe it would be a worthwile risk.

Pulling a firearm on a family member can be a stickly situation, . . . but I guess that I made up my mind long ago that sticking to facts will sort out what is right, . . . leaning toward emotion will get you killed, . . . so I will hopefully do what needs to be done for the moment, . . . without regard to the kinfolk element.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
Quote:
Should I put myself at risk and open myself or family up to injury or exposure.............??

That's a question for everyone to decide on their own. Some people will, some won't. Case in point - the Canadian Greyhound bus stabbing/beheading. Everyone on the bus had your point of view.
Click to expand...

You don't know the one that got beheaded wasn't molesting the suspect's daughter..............

They call it self - defense for a reason...........Every adult (male or female) had the same choice as you or I on whether to be able to defend ourselves should the need arise.............Third party defense is Bad news, too many variables
 
You don't know the one that got beheaded wasn't molesting the suspect's daughter..............
Click to expand...

They call it self - defense for a reason...........Every adult (male or female) had the same choice as you or I on whether to be able to defend ourselves should the need arise.............Third party defense is Bad news, too many variables
Click to expand...


I don't know that answer to the molestation allegations you put forth, and frankly, neither do you. But it makes a good case for your point.


"They" also allow for 3rd party defense in most state laws (I know my state laws, not sure about the other 49). You're right, there are a lot of variables to consider. It's in knowing the information that I'll decide to intervene or not versus making the blanket statement, "I will not get involved in a 3rd party defense", YMMV.

Also, the blanket statement about the same choice is not about a choice or not. Have you considered capacity or ability? How about those variables? There are some not based on "choice".
 
First of all, I don't think I know anyone"who can or does pose a threat to others due to their life and choices they make." Maybe I do, but just don't know it.

To your question. I cannot stand by and watch someone take the life of another (unless of course, the "another" in this case is trying to or about to kill or seriously injure someone himself). Now, one could come up with all sorts of convoluted scenarios here, but I think most will know what I mean.

If the person I know is in the process of subduing someone (who may be a threat to him) I will probably help, but I will not sit back and watch the person I know continue to pummel (or whatever) the 'badguy' after he has been subdued. In this case, I think I could surely find someway to stop the assault without resorting to deadly force (even if it meant picking up something and smacking the person I know).

In the most dire circumstances imaginable (or maybe unimaginable) I could draw down on an acquaintance, even a loved one, to stop them from killing someone unnecessarily. I could do this with the hope of not only saving the person who might be killed, but preventing the loved one from ruining their own life.
 
I once had this scenario thrown at me in a training course.

You see the door of a house open and a woman comes out, followed by a man with a gun. The woman screams to stop the man who is trying to kill her. You shoot the man. The woman escapes. Proud of yourself, aren't you?

Well, congratulations, you have just killed an FBI agent trying to apprehend a nurse who murdered fifty patients after they signed their property over to her.

In other words, unless you know the situation, or unless you are trained in taking charge of a situation without firing, don't go for a gun. Let the police sort things out.

Jim
 
Tough, scenario, Jim.

I'm going to feel almost as bad if the man with the gun chasing the lady is actually a serial killer/rapist and chases her down and murders her, then escapes.

It's a no-win situation?
 
It's a no-win situation?
Click to expand...

It might be. The "third party defense" law is touchy. As several have mentioned, you might not know the true circumstances. If you intervene on a husband/wife or boyfriend/girlfriend, you need to know that many times the wronged party will not press charges. You're hung out to dry then.

Best advice I can give you is call the police and protect yourself.
 
well this is a complex scenario but it did happen here in Karachi a couple of months ago.

A civilian on bike was being robbed @gun point by two robbers. An off duty LEO in civilian dress saw that happening & interfered resulting in a shoot out, one robber got injured while other was escaping. Meanwhile another civilian who was armed & had missed the earlier episode, took the LEO as the robber & shot him DEAD. Well he was arrested & still in jail. I don't know if he had been acquitted or not but it seems like he might only get out if the family of the officer forgives him or if he is a big shot or something like that.
Laws here in Pak r different ofcourse, can any 1 inform me what might/ will happen to the later civilian in above scenario in US?
 
omkhan,

It's my understanding of the law as it would probably be applied generally in the U. S. is that someone coming to the defense of another steps into the shoes of the person to whose aide he comes and is not permitted to be mistaken. So in your example, the civilian would probably be charges with manslaughter in the U. S. and would likely be convicted.
 
Very interesting question.

Having had to draw on a family member to stop a knife attack directed at me, I've already answered this question for myself. If it had been a stranger, I would've shot them. I'm lucky, when I drew my gun, the attack stopped.

FYI: The gun was drawn against my very intoxicated mother and I had no retreat as I was pinned against the wall in the kitchen. I was then able to disarm her, unload my gun and leave the house. I came back the next day and she had no recollection of the events of the previous evening.

Let me just add, I don't have much to do with any of my family and if I do have contact with them it's only for a very short period of time.

Biker
 
That's a common training scenario, Jim. I've seen the citizen shoot the cop wrestling with the woman who ran into a bar. I've also seen the citizen shoot at the cop and hit me, the innocent patron! Will I be suing the Good Samaritan - what do you think?

I also once left a woman FOF participant to her fate while I vaulted over the fight and went to get help. Said victim later shot me in the back (she was the backup in a pawn store robbery) - she said I deserved for not helping her before - :D.

Such fun things and quick moral decision making doesn't occur in three gun matches.

Acting prosocially is very complicated as to the factors and motivations. Some in the gun world think it is dichotomous - you always act as the hero but that's BS. Dave Kenik (who I met at the NTI) had a good article on the superhero mentality and I've researched it. It's not simple as to an action - unless you proclaiming unconditional gun fight heroics on the Internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top