I'll never need a gun - Part 4

Buzzcook, is it worth the "death penalty?" No, it isn't.

It is, however, worth the "Stop penalty." A gang attacking one or a few individuals meets the "Disparity of Force" element, which would justify use of a firearm in self-defense by the laws of any US state.

Note that some states will require an attempt to retreat, with the caveat that retreat is expected only if it can be done safely by you and yours.

We don't shoot to kill, we shoot to stop.

If all works out well, they desist upon sight of the weapon. If they don't, immediately, then the next best option is that they stop very quickly once shots to critical anatomical stopping points commence.

The sooner they stop, the less severe the penalty.
 
Well, I find the statement of intent funny for me.

I have been in the shoot the jerk and save my life situation. Didn't shoot, however was exceptionally ready and willing to do so.

Shoot to kill vs. shoot to stop. Frankly I don't care. Dead, stopped, injured, bleeding screaming, calling for help, I just don't care. Am I heartless? Maybe. But I feel the threat which caused the need to brandish and fire, as the ticket to quit caring about the health and physical condition of the person threatening me.
 
This behavior is reprehensible, but does it warrant the death penalty?
Click to expand...

I am neither judge nor jury. If I was the victim in this situation, and had to use my sidearm, I am defending myself against an attack. The legal concepts here are disparity of force, explained in Massad Ayoobs timeless book, In The Gravest Extreme, and as mentioned before, blows can be lethal, especially when down on the ground and the blows are coming in from booted feet to my head.
If I am forced to utilize my sidearm to defend myself, I am shooting to stop their felonious assault.
 
This behavior is reprehensible, but does it warrant the death penalty?
Click to expand...
Referring to as the death penalty implies a cold, rational calculation of whether the penalty befits the crime with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight. That's what our justice system does. Four or five thugs ganging up to beat on someone demands a reaction sufficient to stop the threat of death or serious bodily injury.

I can recall a situation locally where three of four goons decided to beat up a local maintenance worker. They killed him. When heads start hitting concrete, that can happen.
 
Well before I let 4-5 people beat the cowboy hell out of me, I will do my best to shoot one or more before I start crappie floppin. Im not going out without a fight. The law and courts can hash out the details.
 
Gus-Gus, intent plus malice are the elements for a murder charge, as opposed to a finding of justifiable homicide. If you can't grasp that, you will find to your dismay that the police and DA will grasp it quite firmly.
 
This behavior is reprehensible, but does it warrant the death penalty?
Click to expand...

Whatever the minimum amount of force that is needed to stop the imminent life threating attack is what may need to be done, if one or more criminal’s dies it is unfortunate but the intent is never to kill but simply stop the attack with the minimum force...
 
For those of us in IL this is more than an academic discussion. I am in my late 60's and have a few serious conditions which make me far less able to defend myself or my family with my hands that was the case 30 or 40 years ago. The law does not let me carry a concealed weapon here (and don't lecture me about leaving this awful state; I would do so if I could but will not bore you with my reasons for staying) so folks like me have fewer options. After some recent mob attacks in the heart of the downtown and tourist areas of Chicago, during daytime hours, it is clear that one cannot feel totally safe even in what would have previously been considered truly safe areas. So to some degree, the choice is to never venture out of the house, to play the odds that I personally will not be a victim, or to break the law. Ironically, it may actually be the case that more of these attacks will help the cause of legalizing concealed carry in IL, but so far there is certainly no indication that the powers that be in IL are even remotely close to letting us exercise our 2A rights.
 
MLeake said:
Gus-Gus, intent plus malice are the elements for a murder charge, as opposed to a finding of justifiable homicide. If you can't grasp that, you will find to your dismay that the police and DA will grasp it quite firmly.
Click to expand...

Let me be clear.
I could care less about laws or retribution if I am in a situation where being a victim creates the need to kill.

Malice my buttocks, you really can't believe this concerns a person being threatened, can you?


Frankly I find it shocking that people like you exist.

Vito, I do understand. It is not a good place to be in and like rivers that meander so does crime through the areas of towns.
Me? I would carry illegally.
 
Gus-Gus, I find it shocking that you would let an emotional but pointless grand statement cause you potential legal problems. I am not saying to shoot to wound, shoot to scare, etc. I am saying shoot to stop. This means one of three targets, depending on circumstances: cardiac center, deep brain, or pelvis.

The difference is, my goal is to stop the attack. If this happens with no shots fired, that is ideal. If not, and a bad guy dies, that is incidental. Death and killing are not the goals.

If you still have trouble with the concept, review Jerome Ersland's case.

And Gus-Gus, when you say "people like (me)", realize you are describing a retired Navy pilot, who works as a defense contractor in Afghanistan, trains in a couple martial arts, shoots IDPA, and takes training classes on both tactical and lawful use of force.

Not exactly wearing rose-tinted glasses over here...
 
Last edited:
From a legal stand point he is right... In our climate of the ultra-politically correct society we live in one can only hope to stop the attack with the minimum amount of force necessary.

Should the perp die it is a unfortunate and unintended consequence but it was the result of the BG choosing to try to end your life or that of your loved one.

It is also important to keep in mind that a prosecutor would do everything possible to prove you had intent and post on forums such as this would be much to the prosecutors like.... Our system has evolved to no longer be about justice, it another system of taxation and about rolling up numbers for elections... anyone who thinks its not true only needs to look at our laws...... ridiculous laws one after the other...

We are a nation of laws not a nation of freedoms...
 
Last edited:
Whatever you really think, repeat the mantra ---

I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
I only wanted to stop him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top