The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 14, 2010, 11:10 AM   #26
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
one shot to the right place, especially barehanded, could be fatal. 'Boom Boom' Mancini delivered a fatal blow in the ring, sanctioned fight, against another pro fighter wearing gloves. There's been more than a few fighters that have had their brain scrambled with knockout shots and they were wearing gloves.
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the physics of this and how the weight of the gloves actually compounds the injuries to the person getting hit.

Boxing gloves (heavyweights use 16 oz. gloves) may appear to "cushion" the blow, but in actuality, over the repeated strikes made by professional boxers over the course of a long match, compound the injury by adding weight (ie force) to the blow. The actual reason that boxers wear gloves in the ring isn't to protect the unlucky soul receiving the blow by reducing the concussive injuries caused by the strike, but primarily to protect the hands of the guy throwing the punch and reduce cuts.
csmsss is offline  
Old August 14, 2010, 11:32 AM   #27
Joe Demko
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 14, 2000
Posts: 1,143
It's true that being on two wheels seems to make one a magnet for a-holes. I've been screamed at, tailgated, flipped off, cut off, and generally harassed for no better reason than I am on a bike. It also seems that a fairish number of automobile drivers feel compelled to pass motorcycles at any cost. I find that the best way to ride is to go out with the assumption that everybody on four wheels is both mentally retarded and homicidal.
__________________
"No honest man needs a handgun smaller than a canned ham."
Bill Ruger
Joe Demko is offline  
Old August 14, 2010, 01:52 PM   #28
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Demko
I find that the best way to ride is to go out with the assumption that everybody on four wheels is both mentally retarded and homicidal.
And that they are out to get you.

Seriously. I used to ride. I sold my last bike several years ago because I just got fed up with motorists who quite literally seemed to be TRYING to hit me and wipe me out.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old August 14, 2010, 03:22 PM   #29
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,087
Quote:
Seriously. I used to ride. I sold my last bike several years ago because I just got fed up with motorists who quite literally seemed to be were TRYING to hit me and wipe me out.
Fixed it for ya.

I used to ride. Big full-dress touring bikes. I hated it when 4-wheel drivers would tailgate. And I mean really tailgate - like less than 12 feet at 70mph. I've had nincompoops talking on cell phones tailgate down the freeway, and hotdoggers tailgate me in stop & go city traffic. I've even had a couple of morons follow me through nine lane changes and onto the shoulder "just to screw with" my mind (that one didn't end well for them).

Regardless of who "starts" an incident -- i.e. who cut off whom or who flipped the first bird -- the participants make choices. And those choices influence the outcome of the situation. Ultimately, though, in my view, the "aggressor" is the one who takes the fight to the level of a personal assault or an action that threatens bodily injury.

The fact that someone saw the bike rider trying to get the attention of the police indicates, to me, a problem with the van already existed. If the van was severely tailgating a bike with 2 riders, then his actions constitute reckless endangerment¹ (2 counts) as well as following too close.

The questions in this case that need some resolution, as I see them are²;
- Can the officer ticketing the stopped car be found?
- Does he recall a van and a motorcycle both stopping together?
- Did the 911 dispatch tapes record the van driver saying "You might as well shoot me"?
- Was the cyclist off the bike before the punch was thrown?

From reading the statements, what seems clear to me is that the van passenger was the aggressor who escalated the situation into a physical confrontation. He made physical contact, followed the retreating cyclist to engage in striking him. The van driver was also clearly out of control in that he attempted to "go after" the cyclist once he was in custody.

Driving a 3900 pound blunt instrument in a dangerous manner and being "called for it" can enrage some people's egos. Sounds like this was the case with the van driver. Yet the passenger was even more aggressive in his attempt to physically injure the cyclist. We don't know what, if any, "egging on" he did with the van driver, but it's not hard to imagine.

Nobody in this case is going to dazzle the legal establishment with their "smarts". The news article carefully avoids mentioning the ages of those involved which leads me to believe the cyclist is >45 years and the two in the van are likely < 30 years old.

¹ Reckless endangerment because willfully tailgating in the extreme means that the van cannot stop without striking the m/c and rider(s). This is essentially the equivilant of the driver holding a knife to the rider's neck or pointing a cocked gun at him.
² I think answering some of these questions would tend to bolster the statements of some of the witnesses.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 14, 2010, 06:19 PM   #30
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,385
Quote:
Is shooting someone who is trying to beat you up self defense?
To answer the OP's question, yes, sometimes shooting someone who is trying to beat you up is self defense. It all depends on the circumstances, though maybe not in the OP's case. However, the first Texas CHL shooting was just such a case, involving road rage. Gordon Hale's vehicle apparently bumped mirrors with another vehicle occupied by two men who then chased Hale, finally catching him at an intersection. The driver got out and approached Hale's vehicle. Hale rolled down his window, ostensibly to talk with the man who proceeded to punch him repeatedly in the face, breaking cheek bones and doing permanent damage to Hale's left eye. The attacker started back to his own vehicle and thought better of it and decided Hale needed more of a beating and returned and started on Hale again at which time Hale produced a gun and shot his attacker once in the chest. The attacker died. Hale was charged with murder but the grand jury failed to indict him. Later, Hale noted that he wished he had never shot Tavai. Of course, Hale could be dead now as well.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Article...id=6&issue=003
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 01:27 AM   #31
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,930
Quote:
Boxing gloves(heavyweights use 16oz. gloves) may appear to "cushion" the blow, but in actuality, over the repeated strikes made by professional boxers over the course of a long match, compound the injury by adding weight (ie force) to the blow. The actual reason a boxer wears gloves in the ring isn't to protect the unlucky soul receiving the blows....
Your partially right. Gloves are worn to protect both fighters. Damage is done when taking shots repeatedly wearing gloves. Thats the reason you key on a moused up eye in a fight, hit it repeatedly, it will cut eventually.

Go back and research some of the old barefisted fighters. They got cut to pieces and so many of their carriers were very short.

Barefisted, It takes alot less shots to the eye or cheek bone(for example) to cut tissue or knock the eye out of the socket. Same as a headbutt which usually cuts tissue quickly.

The point I was making was getting hit barefisted just once or twice with the right shots can do very serious damage. Doesn't have to be repeated shots and a long pounding. For someone to say you can't get seriously hurt by a few well thrown/placed shots just hasn't squared off with the right(or wrong) guy. Watch some of the cage matchs. In just three (3 min.) rounds these guys are torn up. Why, bone to bone contact. No padding.

Last edited by shortwave; August 15, 2010 at 01:34 AM.
shortwave is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 08:23 AM   #32
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,385
Here are some life-ending beatings, punches mostly. These do not include people being kicked to death or people severely injured when beat up by another with their bare hands, just deaths.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...itzerland.html

http://www.independent.co.ug/index.p...100-shillings-

http://celebrifi.com/gossip/Family-f...h-2278781.html

http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-e...1634-20637419/

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/2...istown-NJ-teen

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/jul/13/race.july7
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 10:31 AM   #33
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,930
Another question to a confrontation!

Just how close are you supposed to let someone get to you in an altercation?
On the street, if you let a 'foe' get close enough on you to swing, maybe you get cut instead of punched. Maybe your assailant is sporting brass knuckle's or mace to spray you with so he can really do a good job on you.

Protecting yourself/family require's alot of split decision's to make huh!
shortwave is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 11:19 AM   #34
brickeyee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,342
You need to look into the case (common) law where you live.

In Virginia fists (absent some other factor like size or condition) are not normally considered lethal force.

You might be able to show they were in a specific case, but would have to convince the court (judge and/or jury).

That does not mean that fists cannot kill, just that you will have your work cut out for you if you escalate to a firearm in self defense.
brickeyee is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 07:13 PM   #35
Erik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: America
Posts: 3,479
"Is shooting someone who is trying to beat you up self defense?"

Yes.

Is is justifiable?

Maybe.

Lots of factors contribute to deciding that last point, and folks have been arrested and/or prosecuting for not factoring all of them in.
__________________
Meriam Webster's: Main Entry: ci·vil·ian Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\, Function: noun, Date: 14th century, 1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law, 2 a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force b: outsider 1, — civilian adjective
Erik is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 08:15 PM   #36
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,148
Quote:
...............I was able to pull into a gas station and they went on. Had they pulled into the station, hopefully the law would have got there before these assailants had a chance to do me harm.
You ducked that one. Would you have shot to avoid a beating that would have appeared to a reasonable man (and certainly to you) to be imminent?

OR, if the man had continued to approach you with a gun visible in your hand, would you have had a reasonable expectation that his continued approach meant he intended to arm himself with your gun and murder you. I believe that Ayoob has, in the past, made a good case to the affirmative.

I kinda like speeding off while the clown was out of the vehicle with the door open, myself--if it were possible.

Last edited by Nnobby45; August 15, 2010 at 08:23 PM.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old August 15, 2010, 08:38 PM   #37
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Another consideration I'm rather surprised no one touched upon is the very real and very frightening issue of - what will the person who is pounding you do when he discovers you are armed? What will he do if he disarms you? Do you have any idea? What might have ended with a beating of an unarmed person might end in the death of a CCW.
csmsss is offline  
Old August 16, 2010, 01:02 AM   #38
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,087
Quote:
Just how close are you supposed to let someone get to you in an altercation?
Not close enough to lay hands on me. Much of your decision has to be based on your own physical condition and your size against that of your opponent. If it gets into rough and tumble, at my age, I'm going to end up with broken bones. If some 20ish or 30ish guy approaches me and he's only slightly larger than me but appears to be much more "in shape" or just has a lot of upper body mass, I'll invoke age/strength disparity.

If that guy threatening to kick your butt has six inches and 60 pounds on you it's a good bet that he can twist you into a figure 8. If the guy is your size, but he has one or two compadres urging him on or just hanging close, chances are you're in for a butt kicking.

Quote:
OR, if the man had continued to approach you with a gun visible in your hand, would you have had a reasonable expectation that his continued approach meant he intended to arm himself with your gun and murder you. I believe that Ayoob has, in the past, made a good case to the affirmative.
Given a choice, I'll back off, retreat or flee if there's a reasonable chance I can get away. Driving away is by far the best "win" because you can report the guy and let the police do their job.

In a situation arises where someone followed me to a public area to make good on a threat and was not dissuaded by looking down the muzzle of a gun, then he's going to lose. My rationale will be that I'm dealing with:
a) Someone who is in a violent or homicidal rage.
b) A person who is violently suicidal.
c) Someone who thinks he can overwhelm and disarm me before hurting me.

In any of those cases, if I'm right, squeezing the trigger is justified. I'm over 50 years old and know that facial bones are easily broken. That becomes a threat of "great bodily injury" to me. Someone else may have a heart condition that could be fatal if he's attacked. In those cases, the use of lethal force is usually justified.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 16, 2010, 04:40 PM   #39
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,930
Quote:
Would you have shot to avoid a beating...


If I feel I have retreated as far as I can go, my ccw is pulled and my assailant continues to come at me while I've given him clear warning, IMO he has given me no choice but to shoot. I don't know this guy from Adam and surely don't know whether all he has in mind is giving me a black eye or beating me to death.

One thing I do know is if an assailant keeps coming at you and you've got your ccw drawn down on him telling him to stop or you'll shoot, your dealing with someone thats not mentally stable at that point and time.

Again, fleeing/escaping the situation is always best but as a motorcycle rider I can see where there are some instances where trying to escape could endanger the rider/passenger and it would be safer to pull over. Remember, a motorcycle is no match for a car/truck.
shortwave is offline  
Old September 7, 2010, 08:24 AM   #40
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,742
We just had a case this weekend in Chandler where a guy had a party in his backyard. He was charging a $2 admission fee and at some point some uninvited guests showed up, paid the fee and started drinking.

The guy started to wind down the party and the late arrivers began to argue they were not treated fairly and tried to steal one of the kegs.

The wife of the party giver tried to stop them and the uninvited guests tried to slap her around.

The host saw what was happening and went to help his wife and two of the uninvited guests started slapping him around and pulled a gun.

The party host, who is a CCW holder, pulled his own gun and shot them both dead.

The police have ruled the shooting justifiable and are looking for 6 or 7 gang bangers and want to charge them with murder because the shooting occurred during the commission of a crime.

Geetarman
geetarman is offline  
Old September 7, 2010, 08:45 AM   #41
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,385
Okay geetarman, while your story had people getting slapped around, the self defense shooting was not for trying to stop the beating, but to stop a lethal force threat that came out during the beating. At that point, the beatng (slapping around) aspect of the confrontation was history as the situation obviously transitioned from a force situation to a lethal force situation.

The slapping around aspect of the situation does not sound like it would have been even close to sufficient to warrant the use of lethal force
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 7, 2010, 09:04 AM   #42
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,742
Here is a link.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...-two-dead.html
geetarman is offline  
Old September 10, 2010, 04:47 PM   #43
jells
Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2010
Posts: 46
Medical condition

I finished my CCW classes and we discussed self defense. I asked if someone (me) was taking a medication (blood thinner) and a blow to the head or body could cause serious injury or death due to internal bleeding was that justified. His response was yes.
jells is offline  
Old September 10, 2010, 06:19 PM   #44
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,385
Right, so the two intruders were shot and killed in self defense, but not because of the guy and gal being slapped around, but because of a lethal threat.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 11, 2010, 12:02 AM   #45
jimpeel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: Longmont, CO, USA
Posts: 4,458
If this would have happened here in CO the guy would never have been arrested.

Several years ago, Dateline NBC (I believe) went on the rampage against the right to carry a firearm in one's vehicle for lawful protection while traveling. It seems that this guy wanted to fight with another motorist; and when he dove into the driver side window, and started pummeling the driver, got himself dispatched to the Promised Land.

The State Patrol found no cause to arrest the guy being assaulted; and this sent the anti-firearms advocates into apoplectic paroxysms.
__________________
Gun Control: The premise that a woman found in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to allowing that same woman to defend her life with a firearm.

"Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones. But a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house." - Jules Henri Poincare

"Three thousand people died on Sept. 11 because eight pilots were killed"
-- former Northwest Airlines pilot Stephen Luckey
jimpeel is offline  
Old September 11, 2010, 02:50 AM   #46
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,477
Quote:
apoplectic paroxysms.
Hate it when that happens.


If you have a pistol on you and somebody is trying to beat you up, you have to consider at some point he is going to discover the gun, take it away from you, and shoot you with it.

That would be a hell of a position to be in if you couldn't use it for self defense.
ZeroJunk is offline  
Old September 11, 2010, 04:47 PM   #47
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,077
Man dies from beating

I'll bet this guy would have thought shooting back was self defense.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010...s-vegas-strip/
maestro pistolero is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12599 seconds with 7 queries