I live in Ontario. I don't say this for any legal reason. I believe that it is not justified as the danger to everyone in the room is too great.
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Kntx
No. Shooting a gun in crowed room is not justified.
What state do you live in, and what statute says that? I'm just curious, for real. I travel a lot, and would like to know where this place is.
Originally posted by: Darwin333
However, he would be a damn idiot for opening fire during a bank robbery unless the robber had already started shooting. Since the majority of bank robberies do not end up with casualties he would be endangering the people as much as the robber.
Originally posted by: Kntx
I live in Ontario. I don't say this for any legal reason. I believe that it is not justified as the danger to everyone in the room is too great.
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Kntx
I live in Ontario. I don't say this for any legal reason. I believe that it is not justified as the danger to everyone in the room is too great.
I don't disagree with you, necessarily. There is considerable chance of someone else being shot in a situation like this. He did certainly endanger others. But in his own mind, he was doing so to protect the life or well-being of the cashier.
Originally posted by: Kntx
Whatever his intentions, the best decision is not to open fire.
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Kntx
Whatever his intentions, the best decision is not to open fire.
And in your mind, that would be what you would do. In other people's minds, they may decide to do different things. I would likely act in a different way than you in that situation. Perhaps not -- perhaps I'd be pissing my pants scared and wouldn't be able to move or speak.
Originally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.
A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.
The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?
Originally posted by: PAB
In FL, stopping a robbery is a justifiable reason to shoot someone.
Originally posted by: randay
no, because hes not a cop, and it wasnt in self defense.
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: randay
no, because hes not a cop, and it wasnt in self defense.
Um defense of others in imminent danger is as justifiable as self defense.
Yes, the man is justified. And no, you do not make warning shots or scream at someone to drop their weapon(s). That's just asking to be shot.
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
This is heading down the slippery slope into vigilante territory.
What if the citizen is walking down the street and sees someone standing with a knife a block away, can he run closer to shoot the knife-holder even though he personally was in no danger?
What about a fistfight? Is it OK to take a guess at which one is the victim and shoot the other one?
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: randay
no, because hes not a cop, and it wasnt in self defense.
Um defense of others in imminent danger is as justifiable as self defense.
Yes, the man is justified. And no, you do not make warning shots or scream at someone to drop their weapon(s). That's just asking to be shot.
Amused, what state do you hail from?
Originally posted by: randay
depends on what thier mens rea is!
this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck gunsOriginally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.
A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.
The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?
Amen.Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck gunsOriginally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.
A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.
The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?
Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck gunsOriginally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.
A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.
The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?
You have no clue what it is like here and you never will so can it. All the Googling in the world will not give you an inkling of what Canadian life is like so don't even bother. Go pack some heat, Google boy.Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck gunsOriginally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.
A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.
The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?
Really?
http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=...io+%2B%22bank+robberies%22&btnG=Search
Looks like it happens quite a bit.
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Darwin333
However, he would be a damn idiot for opening fire during a bank robbery unless the robber had already started shooting. Since the majority of bank robberies do not end up with casualties he would be endangering the people as much as the robber.
So is the shooter required for someone else to shoot first? Pointing a gun at a person fulfills all requirements for using deadly force in my state (Utah). They have the intent, the capability, and can do it immediately.
It would be different if he shouted he had a gun and was 20 feet away from the cashier.
Originally posted by: Darwin333
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Darwin333
However, he would be a damn idiot for opening fire during a bank robbery unless the robber had already started shooting. Since the majority of bank robberies do not end up with casualties he would be endangering the people as much as the robber.
So is the shooter required for someone else to shoot first? Pointing a gun at a person fulfills all requirements for using deadly force in my state (Utah). They have the intent, the capability, and can do it immediately.
It would be different if he shouted he had a gun and was 20 feet away from the cashier.
Nope. You have to be able to prove that you "reasonably" thought he was going to cause great harm/death to yourself or another innocent person. Pointing a gun at someone during the course of a robbery is more than enough in my state.
I have a ccw and I carry everyday in New Orleans. In that same position I would keep my ass on the ground with the rest of the customers until he started shooting first. Chances are he takes the money and walks out. I don't want starting a shooting match inside a crowded bank on my conscience.
Originally posted by: huberm
I think he would be justified doing this. However, I think a strong verbal warning should be given before shooting. The majority of hostile situations can be resolved by simply putting yourself in control of the situation and neutralizing the bad guy.
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: Darwin333
Originally posted by: randalee
Originally posted by: Darwin333
However, he would be a damn idiot for opening fire during a bank robbery unless the robber had already started shooting. Since the majority of bank robberies do not end up with casualties he would be endangering the people as much as the robber.
So is the shooter required for someone else to shoot first? Pointing a gun at a person fulfills all requirements for using deadly force in my state (Utah). They have the intent, the capability, and can do it immediately.
It would be different if he shouted he had a gun and was 20 feet away from the cashier.
Nope. You have to be able to prove that you "reasonably" thought he was going to cause great harm/death to yourself or another innocent person. Pointing a gun at someone during the course of a robbery is more than enough in my state.
I have a ccw and I carry everyday in New Orleans. In that same position I would keep my ass on the ground with the rest of the customers until he started shooting first. Chances are he takes the money and walks out. I don't want starting a shooting match inside a crowded bank on my conscience.
what if the bank teller had a bomb strapped to his chest(that you could not see) and that the "robber" was an undercover fbi agent. what then?
Originally posted by: Darwin333
Originally posted by: huberm
I think he would be justified doing this. However, I think a strong verbal warning should be given before shooting. The majority of hostile situations can be resolved by simply putting yourself in control of the situation and neutralizing the bad guy.
A "strong verbal warning" to a man that is holding a firearm is simply an invitation for him to take a shot at you.
I have taken a ton of training with my firearm and everything I have been taught by experts is that if a bad guy EVER sees your weapon its shortly before said bad guy sees two holes in his chest. PERIOD.
If you EVER pull your weapon that means the situation has detiorated into a life or death situation. Shouting a warning simply gives the other guy more time to end your life.