incident: baton def. knife attack

goodcatjack · October 28, 2002, 11:28 AM

quoted from another forum in which I participate. I'm not vouching for the verity of the account, just that this is what I read there (IOW, all hearsay rules apply.) still, interesting:

"Speak of the devil. Over the weekend an incident occurred with two acquaintences. At the train station the two of them had a knife pulled on them. A scuffle ensued, but one of the two had a telescopic baton. It took the attacker down immediately, however, it was at this point that witnesses began to take notice of what was happening and what it looked like was two white kids beating the hell out of a black guy with a metal rod...plus combined with the adrenaline of the moment, one of the guys didn't leave it at just one smack and the assailant was taken away to the hospital. Then again, as it was stated to me, they 'pulled a Rodney King on his ass'. Now both of the acquaintences are sitting in jail. There is that line between what is considered self-defense and what is considered excessive force. Personally, I think that knife-wielding muggers who get the stuffing beat out of them have received an instant karma. However, I'm switching to pepper spray."

fastbolt · October 28, 2002, 11:29 PM

Without addressing the obvious differences of law among the different states ...

There's a basic standard to consider ...

Once you cross the line from using ONLY that force necessary and reasonable to protect yourself ... and use more than necessary or reasonable force ... you've probably gone from victim to aggressor.

Justice is the prerogative of the People, resulting from due process as determined by the courts ... not the individual.

Now, add to the mix the use of a "weapon", the telescoping baton, which may be considered a deadly weapon in some states, or "merely" a less-than-lethal weapon in others ... which resulted in injuries to someone ... and you've potentially complicated it further.

Apparently, the local L/E in this alleged instance saw the use of the baton as being at some point beyond that which was necessary to protect life from an immediate threat of serious bodily injury and/or death (the knife) ... and suspected it was excessive and unreasonable, and acted to bring the matter to the attention of the court.

Deciding to legally carry a weapon for personal defense carries with it a heavy burden and responsibility to use it in a legal manner.

You'd probably find a lot of folks that would "agree" with you about the "instant karma" thing ... but they probably won't be allowed to consider that point when they're empaneled on a jury ...

Unfortunately, L/E see this sort of thing a lot ... People that are victims of a crime, and because of how they allow righteous indignation to affect their thinking, they go from victim to suspect without realizing what happened ... and then find themselves on the "wrong" side of due process ...

And then, there's the possibility of civil liability when the poor injured "suspect" becomes interested in playing his new role of "Plaintiff" ...

Blackhawk · October 29, 2002, 08:43 AM

Well said, fastbolt!

Batons are illegal here, even for CCW permit holders.

One guy with a knife taking on 2 apparently young and healthy victims seems like a candidate for a Darwin Award, but then I still don't understand how the 9/11 terrorists were able to hijack 4 airliners with box cutters....

fignozzle · October 29, 2002, 08:59 AM

Sheeple, Blackhawk.
And hoping that if they 'obeyed' the hijackers, nobody would get hurt.

October 28, 2002, 11:28 AM	#1
goodcatjack Member Join Date: October 6, 2001 Posts: 64	incident: baton def. knife attack quoted from another forum in which I participate. I'm not vouching for the verity of the account, just that this is what I read there (IOW, all hearsay rules apply.) still, interesting: "Speak of the devil. Over the weekend an incident occurred with two acquaintences. At the train station the two of them had a knife pulled on them. A scuffle ensued, but one of the two had a telescopic baton. It took the attacker down immediately, however, it was at this point that witnesses began to take notice of what was happening and what it looked like was two white kids beating the hell out of a black guy with a metal rod...plus combined with the adrenaline of the moment, one of the guys didn't leave it at just one smack and the assailant was taken away to the hospital. Then again, as it was stated to me, they 'pulled a Rodney King on his ass'. Now both of the acquaintences are sitting in jail. There is that line between what is considered self-defense and what is considered excessive force. Personally, I think that knife-wielding muggers who get the stuffing beat out of them have received an instant karma. However, I'm switching to pepper spray."

October 29, 2002, 08:59 AM	#4
fignozzle Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2002 Location: under the radar, near the Sunsphere Posts: 177	Sheeple, Blackhawk. And hoping that if they 'obeyed' the hijackers, nobody would get hurt. __________________ aka Felonious Monk on THR. Love People. Use Things. Do not confuse the two. Grey Tribesman

October 28, 2002, 11:29 PM	#2
fastbolt Senior Member Join Date: June 9, 2002 Location: northern CA for a little while longer Posts: 1,931	Without addressing the obvious differences of law among the different states ... There's a basic standard to consider ... Once you cross the line from using ONLY that force necessary and reasonable to protect yourself ... and use more than necessary or reasonable force ... you've probably gone from victim to aggressor. Justice is the prerogative of the People, resulting from due process as determined by the courts ... not the individual. Now, add to the mix the use of a "weapon", the telescoping baton, which may be considered a deadly weapon in some states, or "merely" a less-than-lethal weapon in others ... which resulted in injuries to someone ... and you've potentially complicated it further. Apparently, the local L/E in this alleged instance saw the use of the baton as being at some point beyond that which was necessary to protect life from an immediate threat of serious bodily injury and/or death (the knife) ... and suspected it was excessive and unreasonable, and acted to bring the matter to the attention of the court. Deciding to legally carry a weapon for personal defense carries with it a heavy burden and responsibility to use it in a legal manner. You'd probably find a lot of folks that would "agree" with you about the "instant karma" thing ... but they probably won't be allowed to consider that point when they're empaneled on a jury ... Unfortunately, L/E see this sort of thing a lot ... People that are victims of a crime, and because of how they allow righteous indignation to affect their thinking, they go from victim to suspect without realizing what happened ... and then find themselves on the "wrong" side of due process ... And then, there's the possibility of civil liability when the poor injured "suspect" becomes interested in playing his new role of "Plaintiff" ...

October 29, 2002, 08:43 AM	#3
Blackhawk Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2001 Posts: 5,040	Well said, fastbolt! Batons are illegal here, even for CCW permit holders. One guy with a knife taking on 2 apparently young and healthy victims seems like a candidate for a Darwin Award, but then I still don't understand how the 9/11 terrorists were able to hijack 4 airliners with box cutters....