Had a group of teenagers throwing rocks at me last night.

Status
Not open for further replies.
When the person being assaulted with rocks is elderly, . . . a bad knee, . . . cardiac history, . . . and a .45............

Some kids could very quickly get well acquainted with what it looks like seeing the business end of a 1911.

And about one rock after that, . . . the thrower won't be throwing any more rocks.

Harsh??? Over-react??? I don't think so at all, . . . just hope it never comes to that.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
If you could not reasonably escape, and they were throwing rocks of decent size or with great force, you could probably convince people that you reasonably feared for your life. However, that would need to be demonstrated in court, with, most likely, a skilled attorney trying to prove otherwise.

In states without a "Stand Your Ground" law, you would need to show that you could not reasonably flee AND that their actions created a fear of death or great injury (for a "reasonable person"). In states with a "Stand Your Ground" law, you would only need to prove the elements that justified the fear of death or great injury.

It might be a tough case to win with the defense, unless you had some moderately serious injuries from previous rocks, eyewitness testimony, or some sort of recording. A lot of places with rocks available would also not make thrown rocks very obvious to the police.
 
another one of those huge grey areas, I don't think being harassed by a group of teenagers uncommon. Clearly using lethal force to defend yourself in this case is not the ideal solution, I'm always fascinated with the discussions of what rights one does have in cases like these....

put an innocent in Jeopardy, i. e., the assailant was acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that he had the intent to kill or cripple.
Click to expand...

suppose the kids didnt have the intent to kill or cripple and were just throwing rocks in their dumb ignorance? Small rocks can put out eyes or bust teeth, does permanent teeth damage count as being crippled?


I guess my real question is how little physical abuse does one have to endure before defending themselves? In this case you could never throw enough stones to equal the level of force used against you (group of teenagers)....
 
If you were in this situation what would you have done, assuming you WERE legally carrying?
Click to expand...
I don't care for large groups of unsupervised teenagers because it's rarely been my experience to find that they have spontaneously banded together to do voluntary community service.

I would have adjusted my running route to avoid them as soon as I determined that's what was in front of me.
 
I know the community hates to hear this and i don't think it legally advisable but brandishing in this case would likely send the rock throwers hauling home.
 
Am I the only one wondering about the first and only post asking about a what if scenario? No follow up post?

Did he phone the authorities?

He out ran them. And then what?

Did he just run home and wonder....gee..if I had a gun on me, and what if they cornered me...what would I have done? What would others who could legally own a handgun do....Let me go on a website and pose this question.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
suppose the kids didnt have the intent to kill or cripple and were just throwing rocks in their dumb ignorance? Small rocks can put out eyes or bust teeth, does permanent teeth damage count as being crippled?
Click to expand...

Well, in Alaska:
56) "serious physical injury" means

(A) physical injury caused by an act performed under circumstances that create a substantial risk of death; or

(B) physical injury that causes serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, protracted loss or impairment of the function of a body member or organ, or that unlawfully terminates a pregnancy;

I guess you'd have to look to the courts to decide whether broken teeth qualify. A blind eye certainly would.
 
Deadly force is justified, but kids get the benefit of doubt.

Order of escalation is: a verbal warning, brandish, level off, warning shot, then start shooting people in the face.
 
suppose the kids didnt have the intent to kill or cripple and were just throwing rocks in their dumb ignorance? Small rocks can put out eyes or bust teeth, does permanent teeth damage count as being crippled?
Click to expand...


You do not have to prove their intent. You have to prove that a reasonable person would conclude their intent was to do you great bodily harm.
 
Order of escalation is: a verbal warning, brandish, level off, warning shot, then start shooting people in the face.
Click to expand...

This is it, exactly. Match the response to the level of attack...with the ability to immediately escalate if required.
 
Warning shots are a bad, bad idea. Every bullet goes somewhere, and you are responsible for every bullet you fire. If you shoot the ground and it ricochets and kills an innocent baby across the street – that's on you. If you shoot into the air and the bullet comes down and kills a cop three blocks over – that's on you.

Do not fire warning shots. Either hold your fire, or shoot only at people you intend to put a bullet in.

pax
 
Warning shots are a bad, bad idea. Every bullet goes somewhere, and you are responsible for every bullet you fire. If you shoot the ground and it ricochets and kills an innocent baby across the street – that's on you. If you shoot into the air and the bullet comes down and kills a cop three blocks over – that's on you.

Do not fire warning shots. Either hold your fire, or shoot only at people you intend to put a bullet in.
Click to expand...
This. At the very least, you are wasting ammunition. And it's not like you're going to be issued more at the scene. You have what you brought with you and not a round more.
 
A chilling scenario

You have the right to live, but when you react to the situation your assessment of the level of danger has to be in exact proportion to the reality, and you should know from the beginning that your actions will be examined in fine detail over a likely extended period of time by people who may have a vested interest in coming to the conclusion that you over reacted.

The idea that a group of people armed with something less than firearms do not represent a serious threat because you can always threaten your way out is dangerously naïve. Warning shots, aside from the possibility of hitting an innocent bystander, convey weakness and may be just the spur needed to turn ugly harassment into a vicious attack.

Think of this one too, if you decide to pull a gun out and wave it around and threaten that you're serious, how do you know that among that group of rock throwers that you will not encounter several firearms? Keeping a good watch on the movements of a large number of hostile people is not easy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top