Something important to think about

T

the45er

New member
By shear chance I came across a book on my Kindle entitled Violence of Mind by a guy named Varg Freeborn. I downloaded the sample and was immediately hooked on the book and am reading it now.

The author has already covered many things about violent confrontations and managing them but one thing I just read last night needs to be shared with all of you that surf the net on gun forums, FB and other social media outlets.

99.99% of you guys, I'm sure, never want to have to use your weapon on another human being. I sure pray that I never have to do that, but I'm a concealed carry licensee and as I get older, am glad I have the ability to protect my life and health. However, like many of you I'm sure, I have been guilty of commenting on the net regarding how some bad guy deserved what he got in a robbery or how I'd "kill anyone who came into my house with malintent". The author certainly woke me up as to how stupid and dangerous such "tough guy" language is and how it could definitely be used against you even in a situation where you defended yourself and were 100% justified in doing so!

My internet couch "tough guy" language is definitely over. I hope book endorsements aren't disallowed on this forum and I apologize if I broke some rule, but this book is definitely worth the read.

Have a great day!
 
Good thoughts.

As for me, when I slip my pistol into its holster on my belt, I frequently pray (yes, actually pray) that I will not even have to think about using it, but if I do find myself in a "situation," that I will be able to move in an enhanced awareness of my surroundings, and that I will remember my training.

D
 
It's a fact of life that anything you do, or say, if seen, heard, overheard, recorded or remembered, can be used against you in the "court of public opinion" and MAY be usable against you in a court of law.

People (as a group) are slowly beginning to realize that nothing you put on the Internet/social media ever completely goes away.

People in the public eye have found that stupid stuff in their school yearbooks coming back to haunt them decades later. Including (but not limited to) things that were socially acceptable then, but are not now (socially, not criminally) being cited as valid reasons for them to lose jobs and contracts, TODAY.

This is not directly firearms related, it is a much broader topic, and being firearms related is a requirement in this forum. IF posts can be kept firearm related, fine, if not, it has no place here. Its a valid topic, but unless it fits with forum rules, it's not a valid topic, HERE.
 
the45er said:
99.99% of you guys, I'm sure, never want to have to use your weapon on another human being. I sure pray that I never have to do that, but I'm a concealed carry licensee and as I get older, am glad I have the ability to protect my life and health. However, like many of you I'm sure, I have been guilty of commenting on the net regarding how some bad guy deserved what he got in a robbery or how I'd "kill anyone who came into my house with malintent". The author certainly woke me up as to how stupid and dangerous such "tough guy" language is and how it could definitely be used against you even in a situation where you defended yourself and were 100% justified in doing so!
Click to expand...
This is hardly a new concept. I have seen this same idea discussed numerable times in the past, on this forum and on other "gun" forums.
 
IF you wind up in court over a defensive shooting, generally your side will claim you had no choice but to do what you did. The other side will often try to convince the jury that you wanted and planned the confrontation.

That moves the shooting from defense to premeditated assault or murder. Part of getting there is convincing the jury about you character, and that is where the "tough talk" will screw with your defense.

Why give the other side any ammo??
 
It's generally pretty straightforward.

If a person shoots off their mouth about what they will do in a deadly force situation in a way that makes it sound like they have a course of action that they will pursue regardless of the legalities of the situation and then that basic scenario plays out, the prosecution can use their own words against them to indicate that they did what they had previously planned to do instead of taking the only action available to them.

Examples:

Norbert: "If someone breaks into my house, I'm going to shoot them."

Years later, Norbert is attacked by his neighbor's deadbeat son and ends up having to shoot him in self-defense. In the course of the investigation, it turns out that the deadbeat broke into Norbert's house 10 months before the shooting while no one was home and stole some cash. The prosecutor can now use Norbert's words to indicate that Norbert planned to kill the deadbeat in retaliation for the break-in. Maybe Norbert still walks due to the circumstances of the shooting, but it's a complication that Norbert could have avoided if he hadn't been stupid.

Werner: "If I ever get attacked, I'm going to empty my gun into the loser. Muggers don't deserve to live."

Later, Werner is attacked and ends up firing all the shots in his self-defense firearm, killing the attacker. Video evidence (remember, we're all on video far more often than we realize) indicates that the attacker tried to break off the attack but that Werner kept shooting. The coroner report indicates that only the final shot was fatal and the other shots caused only superficial wounds. Werner says he was very frightened and just kept shooting until the gun was empty without realizing that the attack was over. The prosecutor uses Werner's words to show that he was intentionally trying to kill the attacker, not just end the attack. Maybe Werner's lawyer can convince a jury that it all happened so fast and the stress was so high that Werner just kept firing without realizing that the attack was over, but Werner could have kept himself out of that kind of predicament by being smart about what he posted online.

Basic principles.

Don't voluntarily provide evidence against yourself. ESPECIALLY don't do so in a manner that makes it permanently available to everyone in the world. (By posting it online, for example.)

Killing someone, even under the best of circumstances is still a pretty miserable and risky proposition. Don't make it worse by being stupid.
 
Good advice. And remember Bernard Goetz the New York shooter who shot 4 guys and then bragged to the police when he said, "he didn't look so bad so I shot him again". That last shot put the attacker in a wheelchair for life. He should have kept his mouth shut because it was in the press and on TV what he said. And I'm sure it played a large part in the huge lawsuit he lost.

And this is why I'm not on facebook or other social media sites.
 
I'm good. If you get past the dog, you still have to get past the wife. Call me first please, I want to come home and see that. From a safe distance. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top