The temptation of vigilantism

Sorry to be so late in this thread, but I've been busy lately.

Going through the posts somewhat quickly, I didn't see that anyone has mentioned legitimate reasons for breaking a window: being locked out, or going to the opposite side of a house from a fire to gain access for a rescue attempt.

This comes back to the same issue that often comes up in questioning whether a third party should intervene with gunfire: Do we always know exactly what is going on? If the answer is even a little bit no, we probably shouldn't do anything irreversible like letting fly with bullets.
 
Assume you believe that your neighbor is in danger- the scenario is unimportant.

"Assume" could well be the most dangerous word in the vocabulary of the armed citizen...
 
I agree with all the posts on the matter of Joe Horn.
But there's nothing inaccurate in my first post, just the story in a nutshell.
 
federali said:
In NYS, one may only use deadly force in a property oriented crime to prevent the arson of an occupied dwelling. Any use of deadly force to prevent a property crime such as burglary or auto theft (not carjacking) will land you in jail, wipe out your net worth and permenantly cost you the privilege or right to own firearms.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it depends somewhat on the jurisdiction but by the letter of the law that's not really the case...

NY Penal Code:

35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and in defense of a person in the course of burglary.
1. Any person may use physical force upon another person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such other person of a crime involving damage to premises. Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, and may use deadly physical force if he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of arson.
2. A person in possession or control of any premises, or a person licensed or privileged to be thereon or therein, may use physical force upon another person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such other person of a criminal trespass upon such premises. Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, and may use deadly physical force in order to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of arson, as prescribed in subdivision one, or in the course of a burglary or attempted burglary, as prescribed in subdivision three.
3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such burglary.
 
If an elderly person or a child or anyone who appears to be mentally/physically incapacitated is being attacked... Attackers are going down. Because these victims are apparently incapable of defending themselves or fflee from the scene, and even punches and kicks may be fatal to them, thus justifying the use of force upon any attackers/muggers preying upon them.

Fight between two people on the street of equal physical stature... Leave them alone, but call police if something dangerous is seen, such as combatants brandishing weapons.
 
It's all situational,,,

I would have to do something,,,
Most likely I would simply dial 911 and make a lot of noise.

I do not have the Hero gene,,,
But I can't simply walk away either.

I did that once back in my wild and crazy youth,,,
I saw two GI's smacking a Korean "business girl" around,,,
The very next day I saw her again all bruised and battered to heck.

Let's just say I was profoundly ashamed of myself. :(

I don't want to be a sheepdog,,,
I don't think I would dive in shooting,,,
But I would be compelled to do something,,,
Even if all I could do was honk a horn and call 911.

There is an old quotation/statement/cliche that goes something like this:
All that is necessary for evil to triumph,,,
Is for good men to do nothing.

I may not do much,,,
But doing nothing (again) is not an option.

Aarond

.
 
Rachen said:
If an elderly person or a child or anyone who appears to be mentally/physically incapacitated is being attacked...
Click to expand...
I would consider that to be a completely different bag of chips. That would be an immediate perceived threat to someone's life. Someone needs to dial 911, an order to stop the attack should be given. If that fails, physical interdiction equal to or greater than the attacker(s) would be absolutely necessary on my part.

Added : I feel ya Mr.Graham.
 
I can understand the idea though. This is a moral issue. You see something that sounds your internal alarm. It doesn't involve you personally per se but will you just stand by and to allow "this" to happen to "them".
Click to expand...

Moral issue, perhaps, but VERY much a legal issue, also.:cool:
 
You sort of took that out of context there...If you don't mind, read my preceding posts and you may get an idea of the intention. I don't disagree with your statement, just the idea of being misrepresented.
 
Edit: perhaps I should be more clear. The point is that would you defend thy neighbor?
Click to expand...

Um, depends on which neighbor. The one South of me, um... :D

Seriously though, me shooting a BG to "defend" my neighbor's property would not happen. To defend my neighbor from physical harm or death, yes.
 
Grant D said:
I agree with all the posts on the matter of Joe Horn.
But there's nothing inaccurate in my first post, just the story in a nutshell.
Click to expand...
Often when we deal with these subjects "in a nutshell" is still wrong. A great deal is at stake and the details really do matter.

Rachen said:
If an elderly person or a child or anyone who appears to be mentally/physically incapacitated is being attacked...
Click to expand...
What about a parent trying to restrain a child from running into a busy street? What about a caregiver trying to restrain an elderly person with dementia or some other impairment from injury himself? Are you absolutely sure that you would always be able to immediately recognize the difference?
 
What about a parent trying to restrain a child from running into a busy street? What about a caregiver trying to retrain an elderly person with dementia or some other impairment from injury himself? Are you absolutely sure that you would always be able to immediately recognize the difference?
Click to expand...
I imagine in some scenarios that I can think of, no. Not immediately. But in others, yes. You listed two good scenarios that should give all reason to pause for thought and witness events as they unfold. But if someone were to pass an elderly lady carrying her groceries on the sidewalk, and then witness her being physically attacked by a crackhead(?) all of a sudden, I don't believe you would mistake that.
 
Nitesites said:
fiddletown said:
...Are you absolutely sure that you would always be able to immediately recognize the difference?...
Click to expand...
I imagine in some scenarios that I can think of, no. Not immediately. But in others, yes....
Click to expand...
But that's pretty much the point. You need to be certain about what's actually going on. In some cases, you might be able to figure it out with a high degree of confidence. But in others, perhaps, not so much.

This takes us back to the basic truth that the details really do matter.
 
You are right of course. We must use our ability to reason. Think twice and even thrice before acting upon an impulse.
 
Since my neighbors are not family members I would:

1) Herd my family into the basement.
2) Call the police and make sure they knew a life was at risk.

My reasoning:

1) My family is my highest duty.
2) I am not omniscient.
3) Why increase the likelyhood of bullets tearing through my neighborhood?

I have been called a coward and many other things, but my duty is to my wife and son. I just can't see how going willingly into a situation which has a high likelyhood of turning into a gunfight benefits my wife or son.

Bottom line: I will not use deadly force to defend non family members.
 
Why take the chance ring the police. It would be different if they where armed and coming trough your window.
 
Assumptions are where things go wrong..... If I see someone breaking into the neighbors then I call the cops and if possible try to let the BGs know they have been reported before they actually enter the house...

(the key is letting them know without presenting a target or endangering family members)

If the neighbors home then I can only hope and pray they are armed and aware of the self defense laws and the appropiate way to respond under the law... Im not running over and attempting and sort of anything because I cant be certain that the people who are breaking in arent actually family members who dont get home often and I dont recognize and are locked out.

I also dont know where anyone in the house is and cannot in anyway engage safely even if it meets all the legal requirements... it simply doesnt pass the common sense test...

The very wording of the question I think is poor.... were not out there seeking our own brand of justice... we simply want to live and be able to protect ourselves...
 
Thanks for the replies, I'll definitely need to take more time to write these and clarify. The fact that I wrote that on my phone doesn't help. :D

You guys got my idea. Good debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top