Would you be justified using deadly force here?

[g00n24]

[ame]http://youtu.be/ZWIV5WcIck8[/ame]
Here is a link to a story about it: Shocking Video: McDonald’s Cashier Beats Woman With Rod | Video | TheBlaze.com

Obviously the women started the argument and were the first to get physical. I don't think the guy has a self-defense case after he kept beating them with the rod when they were down. I don't even know if he would get off if he stopped when they went down, considering they were unarmed women..
So, would you shoot in this situation? Obviously no one is seriously trying to stop the guy, and he keeps going after other employees tell him to stop. However, the women started the altercation. Im thinking I would draw on him and if he keeps going shoot considering the women are completely defenseless and at risk of serious bodily injury/death. It's just a gray area on this one for me considering the victims were the ones that started everything.
As a twist, would you shoot if it was 2 MEN that went after the cashier and were getting beat down? I don't know if I would.

 

[drgnrobo]

Thats a good point ,If it was 2 men going after him ,I feel that there wouldnt be any charges brought against him.The 2 women went after him over the counter & was first to initiate contact as well (slap in the face at the counter ).I dont feel it was a shooting scenario cause neither woman was armed but if he would have kept them at bay by staying away from them or even better locking himself in a office (not manly i know) the 2 women would the only ones charged with anything.

 

[Jack Burton]

Not a good time to pull a gun.

 

[g00n24]

Just to be clear here, I am not talking about pulling a gun on the women. I am talking about being a bystander and pulling on the guy beating the women. IIRC defending someone else against severe bodily harm/death justifies the use of deadly force in Indiana.

 

[JOLLYKART]

I watched this many times, Yes his response was excessive for what we know or can see, Yes he could have just run for cover, but I think the good old fashion rear end kicking needs to happen more often. It was not acceptable to strike the counter person and not acceptable to cross over the counter. I would venture to say the ladies will think twice about acting like a mob now.

 

[swilk]

To answer the question .... IMO if a bystander used deadly force in this situation they would spend many, many, many nights in a small concrete and steel room.

 

[Benny]

Just to be clear here, I am not talking about pulling a gun on the women. I am talking about being a bystander and pulling on the guy beating the women. IIRC defending someone else against severe bodily harm/death justifies the use of deadly force in Indiana.

No, I would not shoot someone that is defending himself.

 

[Kedric]

I think they got what they asked for. They were verbally abusive, then assaulted him physically. They pursued him to continue the attack when he tried to retreat to the back of the store and he came back with something he could use to defend himself with. If they hadn't jumped the counter and pursued him, but left when he went to the back of the store, it would have ended there. He told them to stay down and they refused. He hit them when they continued to try and get up. If they had remained on the ground, I believe he would never have swung again.

I feel no pity for the ones who started it. I feel sorry for the guy who is going to get railroaded for protecting himself.

I would not even consider drawing on him, much less firing upon him. Just my

 

[g00n24]

Im really not seeing how this was self defense on his part. A couple of unarmed women throwing slaps may warrant the first few blows, but continuing to beat them while on the ground I feel is more than excessive. Yes they started it, but at what point does the "threat" stop being a threat? I also don't see where the women are trying to get up while on the ground. Personally, I don't see a jury full of reasonable people saying this was self defense.

 

[swilk]

Im really not seeing how this was self defense on his part. A couple of unarmed women throwing slaps may warrant the first few blows, but continuing to beat them while on the ground I feel is more than excessive. Yes they started it, but at what point does the "threat" stop being a threat? I also don't see where the women are trying to get up while on the ground. Personally, I don't see a jury full of reasonable people saying this was self defense.

If the injuries mentioned in the article are accurate I think the guy will face, and be convicted of, charges. His actions were excessive given the circumstances.

But my answer to the question posed here is "no".

 

[jgreiner]

I just can't believe he needed to use a rod on two women. Seriously dude (in video)...grow a pair....

 

[GBuck]

Did he feel his or her life was in danger? Can he reasonably articulate it? If so, then yes. If not, no.

 

[Benny]

Im really not seeing how this was self defense on his part.

Did you just skip to the beating? She hit him, he retreated, she and her friend jumped the counter and followed him. Since he has no duty to retreat, I think it's pretty self-explanatory.

A couple of unarmed women

Were they frisked at the door? If not, then he had no idea if they were armed or not.

If someone assaulted you, you ran away and they followed, would you automatically assume they were unarmed?

 

[printcraft]

 

[g00n24]

Did you just skip to the beating? She hit him, he retreated, she and her friend jumped the counter and followed him. Since he has no duty to retreat, I think it's pretty self-explanatory.



Were they frisked at the door? If not, then he had no idea if they were armed or not.

If someone assaulted you, you ran away and they followed, would you automatically assume they were unarmed?

No, as I said in my OP that they started the fight by hitting him and then followed him. However, whatever threat they posed at first was not present when they lay on the ground getting hit with a metal rod.
Can you just shoot someone 15 times even though the first 2 shots ended the threat?
I am basing my assumption that they were unarmed by the fact they had no weapons in their hands during the attack. Someone is unarmed until they arm themselves by putting a weapon in their hands (or going for/drawing a weapon I suppose). Yes no one could be positive they were unarmed, however they still were not posing a threat once their heads were cracked open and laying on the ground.

 

[zx6rman96]

woman or man, if my bare hands cant defend myself while im at work, then ya, grab whatever you have, but once she was down and he kept beating her, that was a little excessive. they could have had a couple of pocket pistols in their purses, but how would you know until it was too late.

 

[Compatriot G]

This will be an interesting court case. You have a man, who was convicted of manslaughter in 2000 for shooting and killing a classmate, beating on two women with a metal rod. They started the altercation by striking him and then coming behind the counter after him. For whatever reason, he kept striking the one woman and partially crushed her skull. I think this all will hinge on what he saw while the woman was on the floor. If he believed his life was still in danger, even though she was on the floor, then I think he was justified in his actions. I hope he has a good attorney. He is going to need one.

And to answer the question, I don't think I would have drawn on the subject.

 

[04DarkShadowGT]

Im not stepping in to stop it. I mean really who argues at McDonalds, hits a worker, jumps the counter, and then follows them. We need less people like that, the guy may very well be in trouble for continuing the assault, but I'm not going to stop it and risk being thrown into the mix to save a couple people who are no good to society anyway.

 

[Glockapoppadopolis]

Definitely don't think I would use deadly force or even pull a gun on the guy. These weren't helpless victims that were just in a wrong place, wrong time scenario. He was defending himself to a point and it's really hard to see what exactly happened being that the counter is in the way of most of the hits and then the camera pans over to tape the screaming lady instead of the actual incident. Very tough call, wouldn't want to be on that jury.

What kind of person tapes this, presumably on a cell phone, instead of calling the cops? That may be the saddest part of the whole thing, capturing the shock value instead of doing anything to diffuse the situation.

 

[45fan]

I have to agree with darkshadow here. Maybe the man was being a little over aggressive, but the two women shouldnt have 1. slapped him, 2. jumped the counter, 3. continued to get up after being told to stay down. I am not going to step into this situation to save someone from their own stupidity.

Call the cops, and be a good witness.