The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 11, 2017, 02:05 PM   #51
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,069
Remember anything you type on the internet can be used in a court of law.
As such it is ill advised to remark on what your conduct would actually be. For instance if I said "empty the mag into the back of his head" that could be used against me in a court of law.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 03:44 PM   #52
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
B,

In Texas the 'track record' of DAs is known, just as it is in NYC.

One knows that in NYC, or California, or New Jersey, etc... it's bad news for Self Defense.

But in TEXAS, it's the opposite. I am completely confident with a surveillance film like on the one this thread is about there will be NO charges for the victim, nor lawsuit, if they use lethal force to defend against such a vicious beating.

You can cry about possibility of lawsuits, criminal charges, etc... but it just don't happen in Texas like that.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 03:52 PM   #53
spacemanspiff
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,394
Once again, the lack of a duty to retreat does not mean that retreating is no longer prudent.

Or does merely contemplating the option to run away offend ones masculinity perhaps?
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard
spacemanspiff is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 04:45 PM   #54
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,594
Well, I agree with Deaf Smith on his exact point. If you let a guy beat you like this guy in the video, you'll be OK legally if you produce a gun and shoot him before you sink into unconsciousness. It is the shooting him before he is stomping your skull as you lay on the ground where it starts to get touchy.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 04:49 PM   #55
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,663
The "bystanders", including the clerk, have not been given even rudimentary instructions (or they failed to follow them). You notice when the perp leaves, at least in the video, they fail to even lock the doors.

With the aggressor between the easiest path of retreat and myself the best I could have done is taken some form of cover (behind the counter) and issues a command to the aggressor. Even a statement given in a firm voice "that's enough, leave" might have made a difference. I would have had cover of some type before issuing it though.

I'm still not 100% certain lethal force would have been valid in much of that video that lethal force would have been entirely justifiable. Aside from a couple stomps towards the head (and maybe the kicks to the mid-section) the brutality of that attack may not be as evident as the discussion would have one believe.

Edit (after below response): I do get that there is danger to any punch or kick thrown. And I do get that there are examples of "one hit" kills. There is a reason I do not advocate engaging in such violence. I have also watched people survive very brutal hits from well trained people (though in fairness the worse injury I witnessed involved broken ribs on multiple occasions from poorly controlled or stepped into attacks so the targeting is not the same). I think it is easy to overstate the danger. Of course when the risk is severe injury or death it a severe risk.

Last edited by Lohman446; August 11, 2017 at 05:10 PM.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 04:57 PM   #56
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,594
Well, one problem is many people whose knowledge of fistfights is gleaned entirely from Hollywood think someone striking you full force in the head is just boys will be boys. But a punch to the head from an adult homo sapiens can kill or cause serious bodily injury.

Trying to explain to those people why you shot an unarmed man is always a dicey proposition.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 04:58 PM   #57
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 747
I watched the video again twice. From my perspective the victim was completely distracted, cased, and then took a challenging posture once his wallet was smacked away. He held his arms to his sides in a typical but worthless challenging manner, and he blocked the exit.

If he had maintained situational awareness while in line I doubt he'd have taken that beating. If backed down in the face of the assault I think he may have escaped as well. Those are my lessons, and I've been guilty of being distracted in that situation many times, with my wallet or my phone.

All due respect to the different climate in Texas, but I've spent plenty of time there and I've seen freaky stuff in Austin that would make jaws drop in NYC. More importantly the Texas approach to stand your ground and self-defense didn't deter this criminal slightly. Seems to me the lessons are in how to avoid this, not so much in how to react to it.
Mainah is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 05:00 PM   #58
CalmerThanYou
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2017
Posts: 287
Once he is on the ground it gets pretty grey area. Any one of those blows to the head could have killed him. Brain swelling and concussion are scary, deadly. I would hope a sensible group of peers would appreciate that, had he been able to use deadly force. A lot of "what if's" I guess.
CalmerThanYou is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 05:12 PM   #59
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,663
While discussing "how does one avoid this": My credit card lives outside of my wallet (in front of it in the same pocket). My wallet very seldom comes out in public and when it does things in there are organized in such a way that they do not require much attention.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 06:04 PM   #60
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lohman446 View Post
I'm still not 100% certain lethal force would have been valid in much of that video that lethal force would have been entirely justifiable. Aside from a couple stomps towards the head (and maybe the kicks to the mid-section) the brutality of that attack may not be as evident as the discussion would have one believe.
Im not a lawyer but Im fairly certain once he was on the ground and the BG kept attacking him a case for lethal force could easily be made.. the problem is he wasn't in much condition after that 2nd punch to actually do anything about it.

The reason I say this is it is my understanding that once someone is on the ground to continue attacking them is assault..
And to be clear it was assault from punch #1, but when the victim is on the ground more or less helpless I'd say it enters into a whole new territory.

EX: guy comes up and sucker punches me, I get the better of him and put him on the ground.. that's self defense.

Now if I continue to attack him with stomps, kicks, and punches while he's on the ground im no longer defending my self, Im assaulting him.

Now depending on the severity that would probably be overlooked by the cops since I initially was the victim.

The problem with this video is the victim by the time we (or at least most of us) agree he's within his right to lethal force it's beyond the ability to apply it.
That's the conundrum, Justification comes too late to be of any use.

I mean I think we can all agree at the least, that once the fight started it was over.

So then we're left with the sticky pre-fight situation to deal with.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 07:13 PM   #61
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,808
Quote:
I am completely confident with a surveillance film like on the one this thread is about there will be NO charges for the victim, nor lawsuit, if they use lethal force to defend against such a vicious beating.
I tend to agree, and if there were charges I think he would most likely have prevailed, but not necessarily without great personal expense. I think that would be true in many other states, also.

I am not completely confident that trying to do so would not have resulted in his death.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 09:16 PM   #62
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 5,887
Its a waste of time and probably not in my best interests to describe my version of "woulda,shoulda,coulda"

The beating,IMO,would put ME in mortal fear for my life.I think the vid was great evidence.

The problem is,after about the second punch,or victim was not real capable of drawing,retaining,and using a firearm.

Before the second punch and subsequent beating was the time opportunity our victim had to shoot.And all the video would show is an unarmed man who slapped a wallet being shot.
As sympathetic to the victim as I am,I don't see a lot more to work with.
A good point might be,carry and self defense ? Yes.
But its not a magic talisman that wards off evil.

Example: Eventually,being armed may have saved Zimmerman's life,and IN THE MOMENT he fired,he,per the verdict,acted in self defense.
HOWEVER!!IMO,Zimmerman being armed contributed to him putting himself in the confrontation..

If we have our eyes open and our brain locked and loaded SOMETIMES,not always,but sometimes,we avoid the situation.

Regardless the fate we may wish on the attacker,The person who must shoot in self defense ...might stay alive,but I'd seldom call them "Winner"...they just lose less than their life.
HiBC is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 10:39 PM   #63
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,808
Quote:
Regardless the fate we may wish on the attacker,The person who must shoot in self defense ...might stay alive,but I'd seldom call them "Winner"...they just lose less than their life.
Something to reflect upon, and to remember.....
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 03:46 AM   #64
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 4,926
Holy crap.

I would have let that big, hard looking thug take my soon to be cancelled cards, I don't carry cash, and I'm going to stand back and not draw attention to myself. I'm not going to stand in that guys way and argue. If I'm beaten like that I will almost certainly die, but the first couple punches made that moot.

As a bystander, I was almost certain that he was going to die and without extreme emergency measures, I am 100%certain that he would have died from those head blows.

As a bystander, if I was in that situation, I wouldn't have hesitated or given warning, I would have given this person who seemed crazed and unstoppable no quarter. I would have backshot him as many times as I thought I would have to to absolutely stop him, Christ only knows what sort of weapon he might have, and whether he would cut the victim's throat. I'd make sure that I didn't shoot the victim, as I will have sole ownership for killing the victim.

So, as the victim? I'm pretty certain that I would have died without getting a blow in. As myself, it would not have happened that way, I treat c stores as hostile territory and never let my guard down.

As an armed bystander filling a coke, I'll see it from the first sign of argument and will be on point. I would have seen the first punch all the way to the end. Somewhere, I would have pulled out my .380 and fired everything I had.

Then, I would have burned in hell for the rest of my life. Some dumb cracker from Missouri stuck his nose in where it didn't belong and shot an unarmed black man because a white guy started a fight. Video? Since when has video been accepted as truth?

God almighty, that scene made my hair stand up.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 06:19 AM   #65
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,729
Quote:
Bingo,
In the time frame when the victim was capable of self defense,IMO,deadly force was at least questionable. Unarmed man and a property crime.

Once the assault began,its hard for me to imagine the victim could effectively use a handgun.

Pre-empting the horrible beating pre-empts the justification.

Third party intervention? You cannot expect it. It did not happen.

I suppose the point is the time to take action is before you hold your wallet up to your nose while standing in line. La-la land can be a dangerous place.
Two squabbling kids have precluded me from reading the whole thread but the above post sort of encapsulates everything that is wrong.

I've often been quite vocal in my dislike of turning to a weapon too swiftly but at the same time, it makes my blood boil that a guy who stood up to a blatant anti-social act then gets the proverbial beaten out of him and we have to discuss how a firearm before the act would have been illegal. I can see why, but it also seems unjust.

Yes, he should have been more focussed and yes he should have put distance between him and the robber and yes it was only $35, but it still infuriates me that as long as they have the audacity to take $35 from your hand, they can essentially keep it.

It also infuriates me when people say that a gun against an unarmed person is a disparity in force. Anyone saying that should be made to watch that video again and also imagine it was themselves on the floor or a woman or elderly person of less strength than a grown man. Then tell me a gun would be "unfair and unjustified".
A fist or a boot can inflict just as much damage on the human body and sadly there are people in the world who are more than willing to. For $35.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; August 12, 2017 at 06:54 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 08:18 AM   #66
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,808
Quote:
It also infuriates me when people say that a gun against an unarmed person is a disparity in force.
I don't think that anyone who is knowledgeable would say that.

But the are at least three things that are true:
  1. Using deadly force (a) when the actor does not have a reason to believe that he is in immediate jeopardy of serious bodily harm, (b) without also having a reason to believe that the other person possessed the ability and oppportunity to cause harm, and (c) when there existed any other means of avoiding such harm (such as staying out of the way) is not lawful, anywhere in the country.
  2. Displaying a weapon when force would be justified can be lawful in some jurisdictions, but one had better know how to do so without losing it.
  3. Had the actor used deadly force against an unarmed person, regardless of his reasons for believing that it had been justified at the time, he would likely find it most difficult to persuade others that he had not used excessive force. That is a reality in the world in which we live.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 08:57 AM   #67
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,299
Sent the video link to a relative who is a Texas prosecutor. Asked if they would prosecute a bystander who stopped this assault with lethal force.

Reply: 'No. But they might a citizens commendation'.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 12:53 PM   #68
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,808
Quote:
Sent the video link to a relative who is a Texas prosecutor. Asked if they would prosecute a bystander who stopped this assault with lethal force.

Reply: 'No. But they might a citizens commendation'.
I would imagine that one would likely get the same repose from a prosecutor in any state in which the use of deadly force to defend someone other than a family member in such a situation would be excusable.

There are two problems with the idea:
  1. unless the third party had been closley observing the situation as it developed from the beginning, he would have to make some guesses about the innocence of the victim, and the wrong guess could be disastrous; and
  2. as I watch the video, I really do not see where an opporunity for safely firing a gun existed until the criminal atack was over--and at that point, the use of deadly force would no longer be justifiable.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 01:12 PM   #69
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 5,729
Quote:
I don't think that anyone who is knowledgeable would say that.
Yet many do.

Even the OP referred to an apparent mantra that is bandied about:

Quote:
don't pull a gun over a punch
I'm not questioning the legalities of it, none of which apply to me as I live outisde the US, but I'm sure it's even less forgiving of firearms use here, even if self defence is defined as one reason for legit firearms ownership but it has been said here before and sadly jurors, prosecutors and even judges are not always, as you say it, knowledgeable...
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Karma. Another word for revolver: because what goes around, comes around!
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 01:34 PM   #70
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,808
Quote:
Even the OP referred to an apparent mantra that is bandied about:


Quote:
don't pull a gun over a punch
That is not an "apparent mantra", and it has nothing to do with some opinion that a firearm might represent a "disparity of force".

It relates to two things:
  1. the fundamental principle that in excusable self defense, the actor may use no more force than is nescessary, and
  2. the requirement that the actor have a basis for a reasonable belief that the assailant posesses the ability to cause death or great bodily harm.

Regarding the latter, yes, a punch can kill, but absent a clear and demonstrable disparity of force, the fact that an assailant is unarmed will call into serious question any basis for a reasonable belief concerning ability.

These precepts are fundamental, and they date back to the age of sail and to the age of bladed weapons.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 01:51 PM   #71
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman View Post
There are two problems with the idea:
  1. unless the third party had been closley observing the situation as it developed from the beginning, he would have to make some guesses about the innocence of the victim, and the wrong guess could be disastrous; and
  2. as I watch the video, I really do not see where an opporunity for safely firing a gun existed until the criminal atack was over--and at that point, the use of deadly force would no longer be justifiable.
Do you really need to see every last second of that interaction to known who's right and who's wrong?
Listen when someones on the ground getting pounded on no matter who started the fight the guy beating on the half limp person on the ground is wrong.

If you punch me, and I punch you, and you're on the ground how long can I stomp on you and still be within my rights? how about half way thru when he stop being able to even bring his hands up to his face?
What If after the beating I pull out a snub noise 38 and put it to his skull.. Im still in the right cause he thru the first punch right?

How far is too far?

As for his ability to deploy a gun, you're right he couldn't not after that 2nd punch, Most of us agree on that, Kinda the point of the thread but not a whole lotta solutions being offered up other then just get out of the way and don't confront the thief.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 02:19 PM   #72
MikeGoob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 31, 2006
Posts: 838
So many times people see something like this and want to spin it into a scenario where 'if it were me' something would have been different. There's no magic wisdom that if you were there, that you'd know how savage the guy would instantly turn.

Some criminals walk around ready to fight to the death, it's how they were raised or how they live day to day. I'm not that kind of person that could take or give such a beating. Also, killing someone in self defense is a life changing, expensive long drawn out nightmare for so many. I'd just give up my wallet and get a lot of space from the guy and call 911.
MikeGoob is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 02:44 PM   #73
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
There are two problems with the idea:

1. unless the third party had been closley observing the situation as it developed from the beginning, he would have to make some guesses about the innocence of the victim, and the wrong guess could be disastrous; and
2. as I watch the video, I really do not see where an opporunity for safely firing a gun existed until the criminal atack was over--and at that point, the use of deadly force would no longer be justifiable.
1. Actually if you see someone with his arms covered while being stomped repeatedly I doubt you need to wait anymore. I mean it takes an idiot not to see it's a unjustified attack. The guy was not fighting back at all.

2. By the frame 00:37 you can shoot 'em. Easy shot. By frame 00:48 you can bean him in the head. Plenty of opportunity to use lethal force. Guy would not even be 3 yards.

Come on folks, this is no grey area thing. I've sent this video to several well known trainers and they agree, lethal force was the indicated response.

Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 02:57 PM   #74
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,299
Deaf, you nailed it.

Texas is not Maryland or even Ohio. And certainly not CA or NYC.
There's a reason Texas courts throws lots of bad guys in jail for long times. We tend to suffer fools more harshly than other states.

When I caught 2 robbers breaking in, and the cops arrived, the first robber told the cop he wanted me arrested because I held a shotgun on him.
The cop laughed and told him he should have thanked me because "he could have legally killed both of you."
That's Texas reality.

I'm guessing most commenting on this thread haven't lived in Texas and very few have been to Lufkin / Angelina County, and fewer understand the Texas or Angelina County ethos. Trying to apply California or NYC laws or logic doesn't work here.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 05:02 PM   #75
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,663
We are talking about justification and an ongoing attack. As others have noted the continuing the attack against a "defenseless" and unarmed combatant is likely enough for third party intervention. If the fight would have been stopped in the octagon it likely has no place on the streets. This is not randomly shooting one of two guys engaged in s "boxing" match. Nor are those advocating intervention seeming to do so in a manner that precludes verbal commands first. No one is suggesting that intervention must start with a hail of gunfire
Lohman446 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10728 seconds with 8 queries