I had my first "man with a gun" incident last night.

[2cool9031]

You also learned never to get involved in a domestic dispute. It never turns out good for the "interloper".

I agree...the person you are trying to protect from harm, will sometimes turn against you. If she wants to be with a jerk that's her problem.

 

[2cool9031]

It might have been better if you called the police when you observed what was going on.

 

[down3green]

.


That's a tough situation to find yourself in; love, hate, anger, jealousy are all powerful emotions. Throw in a willing "victim" and/or some drugs and you have the perfect recipe for disaster.


.

 

[littletommy]

My dear old Grandma, rest her soul, used to say..."mind your own bees-wax boy". I'm not saying turn a blind eye to everything, but, as others have said, don't ever get involved with a domestic dispute. You are an outsider, stay there. If it's that bad, call the cops and leave it be. I'm not risking going to prison, and losing my guns because a couple of dope heads can't make their miserable lives work.

 

[down3green]

OOOps, forgot to add, props to the cops who treated you and your gun with respect . . .


.

 

[RichardR]

May be she's telling him her boyfriend beat her and went to get his gun. May be he thinks you coming about, sticking your nose in his business is a threat. You don't know them, they don't know you, now you are up in his business and start putting you hand on your gun.

You should call the cops and mind your own business because you are about to get shot if the situation isn't what you think it is, you start barking out orders, and I'm that guy.

Remember the OP had no idea what was going on, he saw & heard some sort of commotion & simply asked the couple: "is everything ok?" - that is not threatening in the least.

IMHO the only thing the OP did wrong in the scenario was that he allowed a hostile male subject to close distance on him, even after the male subject made a threat to disarm the OP & to shoot the OP with his own gun.

Are we really to the point in our society that we can no-longer ask other people if they are ok or not? what if the woman had replied to the OP's question with, "HELP ME!, PLEASE HELP ME!" because she was being dragged off somewhere?

The OP would have never known if she had needed immediate assistance if he had simply minded his own business & continued walking down the street.

 

[finity]

Your right as a second amendment practicer, carrying a firearm to defend YOURSELF or your family; you cannot make the decision to fire on somebody else. Now of course, you having your hand ready on your gun was wise when the person approached you. If a situation turns to where you're in danger, you have a given right to defend yourself.

You also need to keep in mind; a court will view how well you viewed the situation, how you weighed the possibilites.. And not to mention, if you killed somebody who was beating his wife's face in, it's no matter - unless you're a LEO with a good story to boot, you're facing murder charges.

No. I disagree.

The IC specifically allows you to protect someone else with the same amount of force as you would if you were protecting yourself. As long as you can reasonably articulate that there was a need to use deadly force (barring a rogue prosecutor or some such) then you will not face any criminal action. As a matter of fact the law specifically shields you from ANY legal action if the self-defense action is found to be justified.

You do not have to fully analyze the situation ("Detached reflection cannot be required at the point of an upturned knife" concept). The court must rule on the situation as to only what you knew. No less but also no more. You can't make some assumptions about what might be without some evidence to back up that assumption.

If the guy is beating his wifes face in then that sounds like deadly force would be justified in that case (you could use the same if YOUR face was being beaten in). According to the IC you SHOULD be fine.

Remember the OP had no idea what was going on, he saw & heard some sort of commotion & simply asked the couple: "is everything ok?" - that is not threatening in the least.

IMHO the only thing the OP did wrong in the scenario was that he allowed a hostile male subject to close distance on him, even after the male subject made a threat to disarm the OP & to shoot the OP with his own gun.

Are we really to the point in our society that we can no-longer ask other people if they are ok or not? what if the woman had replied to the OP's question with, "HELP ME!, PLEASE HELP ME!" because she was being dragged off somewhere?

The OP would have never known if she had needed immediate assistance if he had simply minded his own business & continued walking down the street.

I mostly agree with you.

 

[Hoosierbuck]

if you killed somebody who was beating his wife's face in, it's no matter - unless you're a LEO with a good story to boot, you're facing murder charges.

I disagree with that general premise. You do have a right in good faith to protect a third party, it's the same standard as self defense. Is your reaction reasonable given the reasonably perceived imminent harm? If she is being maimed and he's pushing on toward killing her...then you have a tough decision to make.

IAAL-a deputy prosecutor-and I am not looking to hang somebody every chance I get. There are still a few of us that believe that justice is our aim, not a conviction at any cost. That being said, we look at the facts of any given situation very closely, especially where a life is lost, even that of a puke.

 

[henktermaat]

I disagree with that general premise. You do have a right in good faith to protect a third party, it's the same standard as self defense. Is your reaction reasonable given the reasonably perceived imminent harm? If she is being maimed and he's pushing on toward killing her...then you have a tough decision to make.

IAAL-a deputy prosecutor-and I am not looking to hang somebody every chance I get. There are still a few of us that believe that justice is our aim, not a conviction at any cost. That being said, we look at the facts of any given situation very closely, especially where a life is lost, even that of a puke.

I wish I could believe that. Reality and the messed up system we have says otherwise. "Reasonable" can be defined as anything, and my reasonable action can turn into a witch hunt with me at the stake. This is what stays my hand. My own legal protection is dubious and far from certain - whatever the code says.

 

[singlesix]

To the OP: Would you have done anything different if you didn't have a gun?

 

[Hoosierbuck]

I wish I could believe that. Reality and the messed up system we have says otherwise. "Reasonable" can be defined as anything, and my reasonable action can turn into a witch hunt with me at the stake. This is what stays my hand. My own legal protection is dubious and far from certain - whatever the code says.

You can believe that there are good people in various prosecutor's offices. No promises that one of us will be the one reviewing your case, though.

For me to intervene in a domestic, the harm I am witnessing would have to be so grievous that whatever befalls me can not be worse than living myself for having not intervened. That's my personal involvement standard. I am a quick draw with the cell phone, however. I am not one to do nothing, but 99 times out of 100, that something is to call 5-0, and be a stellar witness.

 

[henktermaat]

You can believe that there are good people in various prosecutor's offices. No promises that one of us will be the one reviewing your case, though.

For me to intervene in a domestic, the harm I am witnessing would have to be so grievous that whatever befalls me can not be worse than living myself for having not intervened. That's my personal involvement standard. I am a quick draw with the cell phone, however. I am not one to do nothing, but 99 times out of 100, that something is to call 5-0, and be a stellar witness.

That's my line in the sand as well.

Glad to have you onboard. Reps to you, sir.

 

[JettaKnight]

To the OP: Would you have done anything different if you didn't have a gun?

Yeah, I would would have be gone as soon as he approached. He was easily bigger & tougher than me.

Oh, and I never carry a phone, so calling wasn't an option unless I had a neighbor make the call.

 

[groovatron]

Yeah, I would would have be gone as soon as he approached. He was easily bigger & tougher than me.

Oh, and I never carry a phone, so calling wasn't an option unless I had a neighbor make the call.

You carry a gun and no phone? In this day and age, that's just plain irresponsible.

Unless you are a bum or EXTREMELY poor......but then again, you have an internet connection so that can't be the case. At least get one of those prepay phones for emergencies......If your are concerned enough to carry, you should be concerned enough to have an emergency phone.

 

[SirRealism]

Yeah, I would would have be gone as soon as he approached. He was easily bigger & tougher than me.

Oh, and I never carry a phone, so calling wasn't an option unless I had a neighbor make the call.

I second Groovatron's recommendation that you have a phone with you if you're carrying. If something does go down, you really want to be the one to call the po-po.

 

[Sgt Rock]

I thought he would see my gun and back off. I wasn't prepared for him continuing to advance with no fear. My main desire at that point was to avoid drawing my pistol and determined a steady retreat was best.

Sometimes seeing a gun only intensifies the situation. Showing a gun as a bluff is rarely a good idea especially in a domestic situation. You made the right decision by retreating, words never hurt anyone. Him comming at you KNOWING you were armed could have been disasterous for both of you, mostly for him but who wants to waste good ammo on a drunk? Next time call the Cops, better a witness than a participant.

 

[Joe Williams]

You carry a gun and no phone? In this day and age, that's just plain irresponsible.

Unless you are a bum or EXTREMELY poor......but then again, you have an internet connection so that can't be the case. At least get one of those prepay phones for emergencies......If your are concerned enough to carry, you should be concerned enough to have an emergency phone.

Heck, we still carry cells, even though the service is turned off because we went back to a land line. The phones can still be used for emergency calls.

 

[DarkRose]

Heck, we still carry cells, even though the service is turned off because we went back to a land line. The phones can still be used for emergency calls.

This. A lot of domestic violence shelters take donations of disconnected cell phones to give to the women/families staying there, because even with no service, 911 is always available.

 

[Booya]

No big deal trips to court, saves amo. It's all somebody else's problem.

I hope I'm not taking this out of context, and I've read a lot of Jacks posts and tend to mostly agree with him. I also tend to agree with the majority of the posts in this thread. Main lessons here: Be very cautious, have a phone and be prepared to use it.

I do take issue with most people all saying things like "not your problem", "don't get involved"...Etc.

What if the OP didn't say anything? What if he didn't and he drives by the police and her body in the street on his way to work tomorrow morning?

I know there are a million variables in a situation like this and ANYTHING can happen, but there is no way (now I'm venturing into the conversation not the actual situation) I can see a guy beating a chic's face in and not do something. Agreed, I can't just start popping off rounds, but I am going to kick him repeatedly (after I call the police and rush in). I mean, would you let a swimmer drown while trying to determine if they needed help or would you jump in a check to be on the safe side?

One of the reasons I carry is to help protect those that might need protecting. Part of the problem in society today is douche bags getting away with dum**** because they know no one will step in. Maybe if we policed each other and our neighborhoods a little more crime rates might drop, maybe some punks would think twice about being spotted whilst acting like a retard. I'm no knight in shining armor, but no one is getting strong arm robbed, jumped, beating women, raping, pillaging...etc if I can help it. I will intervene if it seems necessary, but I will also call the cops in NY second (prior to intervening if possible).

Just an opinion, and likely not articulated right, but hopefully you get my point.

 

[88GT]

At the risk of , I agree. There are far too many people in this world who seem to have very little to lose. I have a lot to lose. It'd take a pretty serious beatdown before I would think of getting near it. I'm calling the police.

I'm not arguing. I'm simply curious how you can draw a distinction between a domestic dispute involving two stupid parties with 7y/o maturity levels who probably should be left alone to pummel each other, an assault on an abused partner by an abusive partner, or an assault by a guy on a gal who may or may not have a "domestic" relationship. Without any foreknowledge of the parties involved, that is. Clearly, if it's a regular thing and the participants are well known for this behavior, it's a bit obvious. But let's say you were walking in the park and don't know either party.

Taking it further, is it safe to assume that there are no other circumstances--save protection of you or your family, of course--in which you would opt to use your firearm? I realize this would be determined on a case by case basis to some extent, but you can at least answer with an absolute 'yes' or a qualified 'no.'

Again, no judgments implied.

On a lighter note, I think the proper response to "go inside and mind your own business" should have been something along the lines of "Yeah, I'm going. I forgot my popcorn anyway."