Is this illegal?

[rh71]

Originally posted by: Ichigo

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
OP - are you a female or just a pussy?

Isn't this actually more insulting to females than the OP? Curious.

heh.

 

[JTsyo]

Originally posted by: OdiN
1 - If you feared for your life, you're justified in shooting.

2 - If you feared for your life, you're justified in shooting.

If you shoot to wound, it's bad for you because then they can sue you if they live. Also just empty several rounds into the person, because it will look more like you feared for your life that way.

Just don't reload and keep going.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Lots of misinformation here.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
What if you're in a situation where you are being threatened, but when you pull the gun, the perp runs away or surrenders?

If he runs away, do you chase after him? Just call the police?

If he puts his hands up and surrenders, then what? Hold him at gunpoint while you call the police and wait for them to come and arrest him?

if he runs away and you shoot thats murder.

if eh drops the knife and puts his hands up you call 911.

Yeah, this is why you pull out the gun, aim, and don't shoot. Aim at assailant's head, glare into his eyes with a cold, serious stare and say, "You die first. Get it?"

9 times out of 10, assailant will drop knife, void bowels, and flee.

then you don't have to live with the fact you took another human's life.

 

[FallenHero]

My first question would be...why are you aiming for the head?

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: FallenHero
My first question would be...why are you aiming for the head?

Most likely place to get instant incapacitation which is what you want. Unfortunately it brings up all sorts of other problems.

 

[Corporate Thug]

usually a knife is enough to justify deadly force.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

True, also prophetic.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

False, but also confusing. If someone comes at you with a knife and tries to kill you, you can shoot them 10 times if you want, and proudly proclaim later that you were trying to kill them, even if technically you would have stopped after they stopped. The law doesn't turn on semantics.

So long as you didn't actually kill the person after they were incapacitated (i.e. walk over to the still twitching body after you shot it 9 times and put one final one in the head) you can say whatever you want.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

Depends. You may shoot a fleeing criminal in TX under certain circumstances. Granted, the OP situation is not one of them.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Where you shoot someone is completely irrelevent. Either the shooting is justified or not, location matters not. Shooting someone can constitute excessive force, but shooting them in the head vs the body makes no difference.

 

[sourceninja]

In my state both are legal, shoot to kill if someone is attacking you or threatening you with a deadly weapon.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

True, also prophetic.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

False, but also confusing. If someone comes at you with a knife and tries to kill you, you can shoot them 10 times if you want, and proudly proclaim later that you were trying to kill them, even if technically you would have stopped after they stopped. The law doesn't turn on semantics.

So long as you didn't actually kill the person after they were incapacitated (i.e. walk over to the still twitching body after you shot it 9 times and put one final one in the head) you can say whatever you want.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

Depends. You may shoot a fleeing criminal in TX under certain circumstances. Granted, the OP situation is not one of them.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Where you shoot someone is completely irrelevent. Either the shooting is justified or not, location matters not. Shooting someone can constitute excessive force, but shooting them in the head vs the body makes no difference.

Yes on the TX thing on other circumstances, but was just referring to self defense. And like it or not, the guy in the shooting was charged only because he shot bad guy #1 in the head. The police let him go after the shooting and said it was justified, but the DA came back later and charged him with manslaughter. It is absolutely relevant.

The guy was cleared by a jury, but it went to trial. The figures were $18k, not $80k that I noted earlier.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
What if you're in a situation where you are being threatened, but when you pull the gun, the perp runs away or surrenders?

If he runs away, do you chase after him? Just call the police?

If he puts his hands up and surrenders, then what? Hold him at gunpoint while you call the police and wait for them to come and arrest him?

if he runs away and you shoot thats murder.

if eh drops the knife and puts his hands up you call 911.

Agreed. Although it gets a little sticky if after you call police he then decides to run, testing his luck. I wouldn't shoot, and would update the police with his actions, but what exactly is the right thing to do at that point?

i would say you don't shoot. let the polcie take care of it at that point.

 

[43st]

Shoot him in the back when he runs away, ATOT style baby!!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Dari
1. Somebody pulls a knife on me. I take out my legal concealed gun, aim for their head, and shoot, killing them.

2. Somebody pulls a gun on me. I take out my legal concealed gun, aim for their head, and shoot, killing them.

Am I supposed to warn them after I've pulled out my weapon? Can I shoot to kill or do I have to maim them?

Assuming 'somebody pulls a knife/gun on me' means that you were directly threatened and had reason to fear for your life, then both scenarios are legal.

However, never aim for the head. That's the easiest way to miss. Aim center mass.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

True, also prophetic.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

False, but also confusing. If someone comes at you with a knife and tries to kill you, you can shoot them 10 times if you want, and proudly proclaim later that you were trying to kill them, even if technically you would have stopped after they stopped. The law doesn't turn on semantics.

So long as you didn't actually kill the person after they were incapacitated (i.e. walk over to the still twitching body after you shot it 9 times and put one final one in the head) you can say whatever you want.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

Depends. You may shoot a fleeing criminal in TX under certain circumstances. Granted, the OP situation is not one of them.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Where you shoot someone is completely irrelevent. Either the shooting is justified or not, location matters not. Shooting someone can constitute excessive force, but shooting them in the head vs the body makes no difference.

Yes on the TX thing on other circumstances, but was just referring to self defense. And like it or not, the guy in the shooting was charged only because he shot bad guy #1 in the head. The police let him go after the shooting and said it was justified, but the DA came back later and charged him with manslaughter. It is absolutely relevant.

The guy was cleared by a jury, but it went to trial. The figures were $18k, not $80k that I noted earlier.

before I reply, got a link to the story?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Drekce
Treadmill?

So I should just cower in my home and let the criminals roam free?

As a civilian with a permit, you are NOT justified to become a vigilante looking for trouble. Carrying a firearm while running? What are you gonna do, get a thigh holster? That just looks like you are looking for trouble while running. Carry it while walking and doing your duties, not running through the worst neighborhoods hoping someone will give you the chance to be 'the hero'.

Not to mention, being picked up by the police after killing a guy while you were going for a jog with your pistol, isn't going to look like you were 'protecting yourself'.
The idea of having a CCP is to conceal the weapon, not make yourself a target.

How is carrying everywhere you go looking for trouble? You are under no legal or moral obligation to avoid certain areas just because the bad element has a presence there. Go about your daily business without purposefully seeking out crime and you're fine.

I have a fanny pack for jogging...well, a custom leather fanny-pack-type thing. Works great. There is NOTHING wrong with carrying while jogging, especially if you run at night (like me).

 

[DomS]

Here's an end to the gun debate: I'd rather have it and not need it rather than need it and not have it. wouldn't you?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Tarrant64

Originally posted by: waggy
hope he gets it just to piss everyone off.

everyone (unless you have mental issues) should be allowed to carry.

That's just stupid.

Dari, I hope you get denied a permit. Having to even post about whether or not you'd be in the wrong for shooting someone in the head for attacking you should be grounds to deny one.

This is something you should take to a lawyer or those in charge of giving out the permits. I'd be disgusted with myself taking advice from random posters on a forum whether or not it'd be OK to shoot the next guy who appears to be attacking me with a knife while out for my evening run.

If it's dangerous to do so, don't go out and run at night. If you're looking a thrill to shoot anyone without hesitation for approaching you with a knife you have mental problems yourself, and as waggy says, you shouldn't be allowed to carry.

Why? It's both legal and moral. Why should we suck the dicks of criminals just because they're willing to do harm to others? We have every right to defend ourselves, and millions do every year.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
What if you're in a situation where you are being threatened, but when you pull the gun, the perp runs away or surrenders?

If he runs away, do you chase after him? Just call the police?

If he puts his hands up and surrenders, then what? Hold him at gunpoint while you call the police and wait for them to come and arrest him?

Correct. If you fire after they're no longer a threat you've committed a crime. That being said, you only get in trouble if someone sees it. Still, it's not worth it, even to remove a piece of filth.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: jonks

before I reply, got a link to the story?

Here's the poster's original story (site down at the moment)

www.dravness.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=41&Itemid=86

Here is a recap from a few weeks ago (the event is several years old)

http://www.ar15.com/forums/top...=1&f=5&t=741945&page=1

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Conversely, one guy I worked with was sent to prison for shooting to stop instead of shooting to kill because if you aren't shooting to kill you aren't in fear for your life. Well, to be more accurate he fired at the tires of the car coming at him to stop the vehicle without killing the person driving. The judge agreed that had he fired at the person it would have been legal.

 

[Tarrant64]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Tarrant64

Originally posted by: waggy
hope he gets it just to piss everyone off.

everyone (unless you have mental issues) should be allowed to carry.

That's just stupid.

Dari, I hope you get denied a permit. Having to even post about whether or not you'd be in the wrong for shooting someone in the head for attacking you should be grounds to deny one.

This is something you should take to a lawyer or those in charge of giving out the permits. I'd be disgusted with myself taking advice from random posters on a forum whether or not it'd be OK to shoot the next guy who appears to be attacking me with a knife while out for my evening run.

If it's dangerous to do so, don't go out and run at night. If you're looking a thrill to shoot anyone without hesitation for approaching you with a knife you have mental problems yourself, and as waggy says, you shouldn't be allowed to carry.

Why? It's both legal and moral. Why should we suck the dicks of criminals just because they're willing to do harm to others? We have every right to defend ourselves, and millions do every year.

WTF?

PrinceOfDicks...Wands, yes we have every right to defend ourselves, and sure millions do every year. But you don't hear or see or know of anyone who shoots to kill another in the name of self defense all the time.

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Conversely, one guy I worked with was sent to prison for shooting to stop instead of shooting to kill because if you aren't shooting to kill you aren't in fear for your life. Well, to be more accurate he fired at the tires of the car coming at him to stop the vehicle without killing the person driving. The judge agreed that had he fired at the person it would have been legal.

What was he charged with?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: amdhunter

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: funkymatt
what state are you in? do you have a conceal carry permit?

I live in New York state. I plan on getting one because I want to do some night jogging but I think you can only use the gun at the range.

I hope you get denied. You are already fantasizing about killing someone. Hopefully someone forwards this post to the proper person.

You'd be the "proper person" wouldn't you?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Tarrant64

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Tarrant64

Originally posted by: waggy
hope he gets it just to piss everyone off.

everyone (unless you have mental issues) should be allowed to carry.

That's just stupid.

Dari, I hope you get denied a permit. Having to even post about whether or not you'd be in the wrong for shooting someone in the head for attacking you should be grounds to deny one.

This is something you should take to a lawyer or those in charge of giving out the permits. I'd be disgusted with myself taking advice from random posters on a forum whether or not it'd be OK to shoot the next guy who appears to be attacking me with a knife while out for my evening run.

If it's dangerous to do so, don't go out and run at night. If you're looking a thrill to shoot anyone without hesitation for approaching you with a knife you have mental problems yourself, and as waggy says, you shouldn't be allowed to carry.

Why? It's both legal and moral. Why should we suck the dicks of criminals just because they're willing to do harm to others? We have every right to defend ourselves, and millions do every year.

WTF?

PrinceOfDicks...Wands, yes we have every right to defend ourselves, and sure millions do every year. But you don't hear or see or know of anyone who shoots to kill another in the name of self defense all the time.

Every class I've ever taken teaches you to shoot to kill. Every law enforcement officer I've ever spoken with agrees that while you don't go looking for trouble, you don't need to change your life to avoid having to stand up for yourself either. A large number of people I know and associate with carry concealed more or less 24/7 for just this contingency.

I can't even imagine someone choosing their actions based on the potential for conflict...it's a totally foreign concept to me.

 

[Tarrant64]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Lots of misinformation here.

I don't know of any state where you have the right to shoot to kill. You shoot to STOP. The DA finds out that you were shooting to kill, your ass is going through the wringer.

Both situations are justifications (in TX anyway) for use of force. You don't use a gun to dissuade someone or to scare them off. It has to be to the point where you have to defend yourself. If the assailant stops, then you stop. You don't get to be pro-active with it.

If you shoot someone in the head, you should prepare for a big legal battle as well as other consequences. Several years ago a guy was walking with his date. Two guys jump out and he shoots both, one in the head. The DA argued that shooting them in the head was excessive force. The guy was acquitted, but not after racking up some $80k in attorney fees. The guys he shot were gang members as well and will spend the remainder of his life looking over his shoulder. I think it even got to the point where he had to move.

Conversely, one guy I worked with was sent to prison for shooting to stop instead of shooting to kill because if you aren't shooting to kill you aren't in fear for your life. Well, to be more accurate he fired at the tires of the car coming at him to stop the vehicle without killing the person driving. The judge agreed that had he fired at the person it would have been legal.

What was he charged with?

Same question here.

What the heck happened here? Why would someone attempt to run him over? There's got to me more to it than that, seriously.