You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
SD: what would you do
- Thread starter MyXD40
- Start date
newerguy: Robberies and car jackings CAN lead to a loss of life, but RARELY do.
newerguy: If the robber is armed, it's pretty good odds that the victim isn't getting hurt. If it's a stong arm robbery, the victim is typically going to get roughed up, but not really hurt. Same with car jackings.
newerguy: you are more likely survive if you give up your money and either let the robber go, or get away on your own.
you are going to die or kill someone else sooner than if you play the odds.
If you want to play these odds, that is your choice. I choose not to put someone's life in the hands of 'odds'.
I didn't here anyway say every robbery should end in lethal force. Also, Docs don't amputate first because they can monitor most problems with different types of treatment without risk of immenent loss of life or limb. We don't have that luxury with a lethal encounter. If a doc sees immenent loss of limb or life, they will quickly amputate. So will I.newerguy: Saying that every robbery should be ended with lethal force would be like saying that doctors should automatically amputate every limb with a rash or infection.
Your right, the law puts no burden on me to help. I put that burden on myself. If someone doesn't have that burden, they should not intervene.No. The law, which is society acting collectively through is legislative body and courts, imposes no duty on private citizens to assist anyone
Cops are held to a higher standard than citizens btw.
If you're going to intervene, you had best be overwhelmingly sure of the circumstances -- since you are betting your freedom, your family's happiness, and everything you own on being right at the moment you put your firearm into the equation.
Personally, I'm not taking that gamble unless I am overwhelmingly sure of who the players are, who's the good guy, who's the bad guy, and what provoked the whole thing. A scene that I just stumbled on, where I don't know either one of the participants, simply cannot meet that standard.
I'll retreat to my car, call the cops, and keep an eye on the situation until the cops arrive. If anyone leaves, I'll note the license plate and the direction of travel.
For those saying, "moral imperative to act" -- calling the cops IS acting. It's just not quite as macho as rushing in.
pax
Personally, I'm not taking that gamble unless I am overwhelmingly sure of who the players are, who's the good guy, who's the bad guy, and what provoked the whole thing. A scene that I just stumbled on, where I don't know either one of the participants, simply cannot meet that standard.
I'll retreat to my car, call the cops, and keep an eye on the situation until the cops arrive. If anyone leaves, I'll note the license plate and the direction of travel.
For those saying, "moral imperative to act" -- calling the cops IS acting. It's just not quite as macho as rushing in.
pax
That is not true. Non police are held to a reasonable man standard while police officers are held to a professional standard. What the average citizen can do would oft times put a cop in jail.
Cops are held to a higher standard than citizens btw.
That is not the case in New York. Police officers have significantly greater legal justification in using deadly physical force than a private person under most circumstances, not the least of which being no duty to retreat, and an expanded ability to used deadly force to make an arrest or prevent an escape. There is no "professional standard" or standard higher than reasonable in Article 35 of the NYS Penal Law, and I have not seen a mention of anything but "reasonable" being used in civil case law.
That is not the case in New York. Police officers have significantly greater legal justification in using deadly physical force than a private person under most circumstances, not the least of which being no duty to retreat, and an expanded ability to used deadly force to make an arrest or prevent an escape. There is no "professional standard" or standard higher than reasonable in Article 35 of the NYS Penal Law, and I have not seen a mention of anything but "reasonable" being used in civil case law.
It's not the case in most places. As you say, police officers have far greater authority and discretion in the use of all levels of force than civilians. Civilians are restricted to the use of force necessary to match that force used against them. Officers are authorized to use overwhelming force against a suspect.
And the standard they are held to is basically 1) was the act within policy and 2) was the act reasonable under the circumstances. That's why police may walk away from a bad shoot that would put a civilian in prison.
That is not the case in New York. Police officers have significantly greater legal justification in using deadly physical force than a private person under most circumstances, not the least of which being no duty to retreat,
that is atypical for America
If you're going to intervene, you had best be overwhelmingly sure of the circumstances -- since you are betting your freedom, your family's happiness, and everything you own on being right at the moment you put your firearm into the equation.
+1
I agree 100%
One of the most important things our instuctors drilled into our head over and over again was how careful you had to be, and how SURE you had to be before you pull that gun.
They used a scenario like this: You come out into a parking lot, at night, lit well by the larger overhead light types, but still shadowy in some places. You see a knock down, dragout fight in one of those shadowy places. One guy finally gets the best, and pulls a gun. If you yell, maybe the one with the gun swings toward the sound, inadvertently pointing the gun towards you, and you fire.....killing a plainclothes or off-duty LEO.
There were so many more variations of this, where in alot of the cses, a guy coming to the scene in the middle, shoots, or would shoot the wrong guy.
They used a scenario like this: You come out into a parking lot, at night, lit well by the larger overhead light types, but still shadowy in some places. You see a knock down, dragout fight in one of those shadowy places. One guy finally gets the best, and pulls a gun. If you yell, maybe the one with the gun swings toward the sound, inadvertently pointing the gun towards you, and you fire.....killing a plainclothes or off-duty LEO.
There were so many more variations of this, where in alot of the cses, a guy coming to the scene in the middle, shoots, or would shoot the wrong guy.
They used a scenario like this: You come out into a parking lot, at night, lit well by the larger overhead light types, but still shadowy in some places. You see a knock down, dragout fight in one of those shadowy places. One guy finally gets the best, and pulls a gun. If you yell, maybe the one with the gun swings toward the sound, inadvertently pointing the gun towards you, and you fire.....killing a plainclothes or off-duty LEO.
It is certainly easier to come up with alot of reasons to do nothing...
As someone pointed out, calling 911 on your cell phone and observing is not the same as doing nothing. I would never pull a weapon unless I had to shoot someone, and I would not shoot someone unless I was sure I had no other choice. I have even stated on other threads that if I am not sure of the background I am prepared to die rather than shoot an innocent by accident.
I am reminded of that incident where the kids kidnapped a girl as a camp prank. That could have been very very bad if someone had over-reacted. But is it even over-reacting if you see a teenage girl get kidnapped and interject yourself into the situation?
I am reminded of that incident where the kids kidnapped a girl as a camp prank. That could have been very very bad if someone had over-reacted. But is it even over-reacting if you see a teenage girl get kidnapped and interject yourself into the situation?
__________________But is it even over-reacting if you see a teenage girl get kidnapped and interject yourself into the situation?
Not over-reacting at all, as long as it's handled correctly. The last thing the kidnapper wants is to be caught. He wants to be free to do his dastardly deeds. Knowing he's been ID'd and the cops are on the way is a big problem to him. Be too overzealous, and you might give him the chance to do away with the witness (you). Now he's back to his agenda. Should your gun be at the ready? YUP, but it's ther to protect you, not to go stick in his face. What's to stop him from slitting her throat to cover his getaway? Now who's in a jam?
Last edited:
teejhot.40cal
New member
I am reminded of that incident where the kids kidnapped a girl as a camp prank. That could have been very very bad if someone had over-reacted. But is it even over-reacting if you see a teenage girl get kidnapped and interject yourself into the situation?
Newsflash. That isn't a prank. That is downright stupid. Prank is sending someone to to find a left-handed smoke shifter or dropping a tent on them. Kidnapping is a crime. Fake kidnapping is a crime. What if it wasn't a prank? Would the people then have under-reacted? I am sorry but I feel that once the person is in the kidnappers vehicle, they are in very grave danger.
Should your gun be at the ready? YUP, but it's their to protect you, not to go stick in his face. What's to stop him from slitting her throat to cover his getaway? Now who's in a jam?
+1 on that statement.
First case scenario. Call 911 and wait and watch at a distance. Only if it looks like something "Bad is gonna happen." Keep a hand in a places easy to access your handgun (Or on it if you have high reason to believe the person is armed).
If he starts going out of control yell "Hey. I got the cops on the phone. Back off." Then a few differant things based on reactions, running, or attacking etc.
If he punches a woman in the face.... Tell him to back off and dial 911 on the phone (See below). If he makes threatening moves towards you I would draw and aim at him before he gets very close.... The sight of a gun has a good chance of scaring him off.
About 911. From what I have heard about fights/scenarios... I personally believe that you should leave the phone connected to the PD. At least there might be audio record of what is going on (Thus having a better chance if you get sued/tried).
I dunno....
If he starts going out of control yell "Hey. I got the cops on the phone. Back off." Then a few differant things based on reactions, running, or attacking etc.
If he punches a woman in the face.... Tell him to back off and dial 911 on the phone (See below). If he makes threatening moves towards you I would draw and aim at him before he gets very close.... The sight of a gun has a good chance of scaring him off.
About 911. From what I have heard about fights/scenarios... I personally believe that you should leave the phone connected to the PD. At least there might be audio record of what is going on (Thus having a better chance if you get sued/tried).
I dunno....
JoeBlackSpade
New member
The best response, and the best way to fulfill your obligations as a concerned citizen (IMO) is to uphold the laws and principles we hold dear.
If you see a crime in progress:
1.) Call the cops
2.) Get a detailed visual description
3.) Use all your senses to identify threats to your own life, followed by the lives of your family, and then lastly to the lives of those around you
4.) Stay on the phone as long as is necessary to relay the situation in detail to the cops.
They are trained in getting to the "bottom" of the situation, including domestic disputes, unlike the humorous story related by Tanzer (ROFL!). Getting in the middle of a knock-down drag out might backfire. A little kid, getting stomped to death by a brute, or someone pouring gasoline on their Grandma is quite different. Anything short of imminent death, however, should keep you on that phone, singing like a Mockingbird.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRMfxzy9KlM (LANGUAGE)
The more info you give, the better equipped LE is going to be when they arrive, and (ultimately) the more likely justice will be served- which is ultimately what we all want.
If you see a crime in progress:
1.) Call the cops
2.) Get a detailed visual description
3.) Use all your senses to identify threats to your own life, followed by the lives of your family, and then lastly to the lives of those around you
4.) Stay on the phone as long as is necessary to relay the situation in detail to the cops.
They are trained in getting to the "bottom" of the situation, including domestic disputes, unlike the humorous story related by Tanzer (ROFL!). Getting in the middle of a knock-down drag out might backfire. A little kid, getting stomped to death by a brute, or someone pouring gasoline on their Grandma is quite different. Anything short of imminent death, however, should keep you on that phone, singing like a Mockingbird.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRMfxzy9KlM (LANGUAGE)
The more info you give, the better equipped LE is going to be when they arrive, and (ultimately) the more likely justice will be served- which is ultimately what we all want.
About 911. From what I have heard about fights/scenarios... I personally believe that you should leave the phone connected to the PD. At least there might be audio record of what is going on (Thus having a better chance if you get sued/tried).
That's exactly what we were taught during our CPL class. Great suggestion. The example we were given was of a home invasion - where your voice on the phone shouting "STOP! I've called the police, I'm armed and will shoot" would help you in court if the BG actually came in and you had to shoot.
Personally, I'm not gonna play Cops and Robbers. I'll let the professionals handle that - they're properly equiped, protected and and paid to do that sh!t. I'm gonna get out of the way and shoot whoever is stupid enough to think I'm the next victim.