Friend pulled gun on two guys.
- Thread starter payne
- Start date
AA,
deadly force may be used to defend against the imminent use of deadly physical force against you or another. "Deadly physical force" means force which, under the circumstances in which it is used, is readily capable of causing death or other serious physical injury. "Serious physical injury" means physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes death or serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ.
What will happen when 2 males start beating on you? Sounds serious to me. Reasonable to see he was fine in his actions.
deadly force may be used to defend against the imminent use of deadly physical force against you or another. "Deadly physical force" means force which, under the circumstances in which it is used, is readily capable of causing death or other serious physical injury. "Serious physical injury" means physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes death or serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ.
What will happen when 2 males start beating on you? Sounds serious to me. Reasonable to see he was fine in his actions.
jburtonpdx
New member
He got to go home and have dinner.... Does your buddy have family? Bet they were glad he made it home for dinner. Bet you were glad - did he owe you a beer or 2-- good time to collect maybe offer to buy him one.
Your friend lived through what could have been the end for anybody. Time to be thankfull and celebrate.
I support what he did and believe him to be the good guy in the scene described.
AttackTurtle
New member
I have not seen a phone pimp but we have a lot of ATM pimps.
I would have fled and if followed, I would have drawn. My friend was attacked in a very simular situation. HE DID NOT DRAW. they split up just like this and then attacked him. They found his gun while beatting him up
and then put him in the trunk of his car. An hour later, they let him out and told him to run while they emptied his gun at him!!! He was shot and had a few broken bones but was alive. Dont carry unless you are willing to defend yourself. Those 2 punks made it very clear with their body language what they were doing. I would have tried to retreat first, even after October when I might not have to but if they pursued, I would draw and even fire if pressed.
I would have fled and if followed, I would have drawn. My friend was attacked in a very simular situation. HE DID NOT DRAW. they split up just like this and then attacked him. They found his gun while beatting him up
and then put him in the trunk of his car. An hour later, they let him out and told him to run while they emptied his gun at him!!! He was shot and had a few broken bones but was alive. Dont carry unless you are willing to defend yourself. Those 2 punks made it very clear with their body language what they were doing. I would have tried to retreat first, even after October when I might not have to but if they pursued, I would draw and even fire if pressed.Practically, I think he did just fine. Nobody got hurt. Nobody went to jail.
Legally (which isn't necesarily the same thing), I might ask myself how I would have reacted if I didn't have a gun. With no weapon, when I am confronted by two large gentlemen telling me to pay a toll I will either pay the toll or turn around and walk/run in the other direction. What they're doing isn't legal, but I'm in no position to argue with them.
I would suggest that any action other than the above prevents you from appearing as a victim to a jury (should it come to that), especially if you don't have witnesses to back you up.
In my eyes, your friend chose not to retreat when he could have. Had he gone condition orangeish-red with their first payment request he could have been maneuvering away from the threat even as he tried to deescalate.
In a neighborhood I'm unfamiliar with, I can't think of anything that someone I don't know could say to which I would respond "yeah right", especially if that person is going out of their way to say it to me. Alarm bells should have been ringing sooner than they did.
There is no taking the law into your own hands, whether you are armed or not. Shooting someone as you are running away may look very different (to a jury) from shooting someone so you could get to the pay phone God put there for you to use.
I realize that he had to get to a phone, but that wasn't the last phone on earth.
Legally (which isn't necesarily the same thing), I might ask myself how I would have reacted if I didn't have a gun. With no weapon, when I am confronted by two large gentlemen telling me to pay a toll I will either pay the toll or turn around and walk/run in the other direction. What they're doing isn't legal, but I'm in no position to argue with them.
I would suggest that any action other than the above prevents you from appearing as a victim to a jury (should it come to that), especially if you don't have witnesses to back you up.
In my eyes, your friend chose not to retreat when he could have. Had he gone condition orangeish-red with their first payment request he could have been maneuvering away from the threat even as he tried to deescalate.
In a neighborhood I'm unfamiliar with, I can't think of anything that someone I don't know could say to which I would respond "yeah right", especially if that person is going out of their way to say it to me. Alarm bells should have been ringing sooner than they did.
There is no taking the law into your own hands, whether you are armed or not. Shooting someone as you are running away may look very different (to a jury) from shooting someone so you could get to the pay phone God put there for you to use.
I realize that he had to get to a phone, but that wasn't the last phone on earth.
Last edited:
BC, have to correct one thing. You don't "have to KNOW" your life is in danger, you have to BELIEVE it. I would have probably believed that these two were planning on attacking me and robbing me, perhaps more. I'm sure not going to let them get close enough for me to hand them money. But, if you believe differently, by all means, do what you think is right. (no sarcasm intended there)
XavierBreath
New member
Thanks AT. I'm glad your friend survived. That is why you don't get into a fist fight with two punks when you are carrying a gun. A gun and no willingness to use it can be very dangerous.
I'm not advocating brandishing, but doggone it, you have to be able to draw the gun to use it. How long are ya gonna wait?
So where was this guy going to retreat to.
His broken down car in what was probably not a great neighbor hood? (there's usually a good reason that malls are abandoned)
Was he then supposed to hunker down in his car and wait for the police to happen by, before the BGs friends did?, If he even made it back to his car.
20 feet is not the magical DMZ the protects you from injury or prosecution.
If you wait till they're that close to decide to act, you are already behind the eight ball.
Remember Bernard Goetz was only asked if he had change for a video game
His broken down car in what was probably not a great neighbor hood? (there's usually a good reason that malls are abandoned)
Was he then supposed to hunker down in his car and wait for the police to happen by, before the BGs friends did?, If he even made it back to his car.
20 feet is not the magical DMZ the protects you from injury or prosecution.
If you wait till they're that close to decide to act, you are already behind the eight ball.
Remember Bernard Goetz was only asked if he had change for a video game
Gotta love Florida
776.031 ... However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; car-jacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
You may use deadly force if you reasonably believe you are about to be imminently robbed or burglarized, and that it will prevent said prevent said crime.
Notice no need for a belief of "deadly force" used against you. Just threat of "physical force" or "violence".
776.031 ... However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; car-jacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
You may use deadly force if you reasonably believe you are about to be imminently robbed or burglarized, and that it will prevent said prevent said crime.
Notice no need for a belief of "deadly force" used against you. Just threat of "physical force" or "violence".
In Arizona, the intended victim would have been perfectly within his rights to threaten to use deadly force. If they continued to advance, he would have been justified in shooting both of them (that is not to say that he wouldn't be arrested or even charged; however, when the law is applied to the facts, the likely outcome would be a justifiable homicide.
In Arizona the standard for employing deadly force is a four-pronged test:
1. That there be an immediate threat...
2. Of death or grave bodily harm...
3. To yourself or another person...
4. Coupled with the means of carrying it out.
This four pronged test is actually one sentence:
That there be an immediate threat of death or grave bodily harm to yourself or another person coupled with the means of carrying it out.
If all four of these conditions are met in the scenario desribed and the victim reasonably believes all four of the above apply then it is justified.
Arizona law does not require that the perpetrator have a weapon, only that the perpetrator have the means of causing immediate death or grave bodily harm - this includes the use of one's fists.
In Arizona the standard for employing deadly force is a four-pronged test:
1. That there be an immediate threat...
2. Of death or grave bodily harm...
3. To yourself or another person...
4. Coupled with the means of carrying it out.
This four pronged test is actually one sentence:
That there be an immediate threat of death or grave bodily harm to yourself or another person coupled with the means of carrying it out.
If all four of these conditions are met in the scenario desribed and the victim reasonably believes all four of the above apply then it is justified.
Arizona law does not require that the perpetrator have a weapon, only that the perpetrator have the means of causing immediate death or grave bodily harm - this includes the use of one's fists.
Here in Eugene we had a college student die when he was struck with one blow from a human fist.
I think that your friend did right. I would though have him consider buying a cheap TracPhone or some other pre-paid cell service (no contracts, you buy your minutes).
As was mentioned, all the older cell phones have 911 capability. But in this situation, at the beginning, calling 911 for a broken down car wouldn't have been dealt well with the dispatcher (they, the LEO's, are not there to be AAA). It would have been too late to try to use it during the confrontation.
I know that technology is expensive (cell phones) but it's best to have multiple tools in your self defense tool box then just try to rely on only one.
Wayne
I think that your friend did right. I would though have him consider buying a cheap TracPhone or some other pre-paid cell service (no contracts, you buy your minutes).
As was mentioned, all the older cell phones have 911 capability. But in this situation, at the beginning, calling 911 for a broken down car wouldn't have been dealt well with the dispatcher (they, the LEO's, are not there to be AAA). It would have been too late to try to use it during the confrontation.
I know that technology is expensive (cell phones) but it's best to have multiple tools in your self defense tool box then just try to rely on only one.
Wayne
rallyhound
New member
In MN, being strongarmed (mugged) is not grounds for pulling your weap.
I disagree.
If you are in danger for your life or of great bodily injury is what the law basically says in MN
I disagree.
If you are in danger for your life or of great bodily injury is what the law basically says in MN