|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 4, 2017, 12:25 PM | #76 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
In a police case: https://www.policeone.com/use-of-for...ideo-released/
- we have a somewhat similar concept. The officer used quite a deal of force on an opponent who was seemingly out of the fight. An interesting line: Quote:
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
November 5, 2017, 07:30 PM | #77 |
Member
Join Date: October 3, 2017
Posts: 18
|
Committing crimes should be a very dangerous way to make a living.
__________________
Optimism is true moral courage. - Sir Ernest Shackleton http://www.anamericanwithagun.com/ |
November 8, 2017, 01:04 AM | #78 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 938
|
Quote:
1. I used to have one of Marc's books, I thought it good back then, but this new material seems wonky. Keeping in mind he has to keep food on the table, he seems to be going the Mossad Ayoob legal expert route, but with knives. 2. A lot depends on state law in self defense. The Stand your ground law in Florida would change this mental exercise for those in that juridiction. 3. article does not mention my question about Jeans or leather and slashing. Training, or only mentally preparing to preform one kind of strike in an SD situation is trianing to fail. 4. No one here would (or should want) to be in a knife fight/ duel. It would be very messy for both sides. (Marc used to say be prepared to get cut up). sometimes just running away is not always possible, even if preffered by some. Last edited by Frank Ettin; November 8, 2017 at 02:31 AM. Reason: delete snark |
|
November 8, 2017, 08:00 AM | #79 | |
Staff
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
|
Quote:
|
|
November 8, 2017, 08:43 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 938
|
In this way: (3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
http://http://www.slaw.ca/2012/03/29...-law-the-text/ It used to be that you were immune from civil suits, but the FL supreme court Nixed that. SO now the state will cover your court costs, and lost income. For arguments sake, lets say you lose in civil court... the homested/bankrupcy laws in Florida allow you keep your house, car, and up to 160 acres of primary residence farmland. http://https://www.alperlaw.com/asse...ead-exemption/ |
November 8, 2017, 09:30 PM | #81 | |
Staff
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
|
Quote:
The court will award such posts, but they must be paid by the defendant, if he can do so. But--that will happen if and only if the evidence presented supports the defendant's case. Where do you get your ideas? |
|
November 8, 2017, 11:30 PM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 938
|
Ok let me clarify and add to what you said, you must persue your cost you pay up front. The law is clear you if you are free from prosecution under the "stand your ground law" you can recover costs.
Last edited by IZZY; November 8, 2017 at 11:38 PM. |
November 8, 2017, 11:33 PM | #83 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 938
|
Quote:
And if not, then not. I don't think it us wise to worry to much, or second geuss defending your self (or in FL others as well), when you have very little time if any to respond to such situations. In many states bankrupcy laws will allow you to live in your home and drive a car, keep farm equipment, Etc. It pays to look up your own state laws, even if you never want to go bankrupt. (I never have). Last edited by IZZY; November 8, 2017 at 11:56 PM. |
|
November 9, 2017, 12:37 AM | #84 | |||||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
All immunity laws say that one will be immune from suit if certain facts exist. However, if there's a dispute about whether those facts exist, the only way to resolve such dispute is through litigation. For more in depth discussion of these issues, see the following threads:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|||||
November 9, 2017, 05:47 PM | #85 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2000
Location: Florida
Posts: 938
|
Quote:
I talk about Florida because it's the State I know best in terms of law. Florida is one example of how a state law ( jurisdiction) can effect how we pontificate on the legal aspects of self Defense. 29+8 States might be GTG in terms of Stand your ground ( and good for them/ Us) that leave maybe 13 states where you might be expected to retreat. So again, where you are might affect this mental exercise. Yes I do understand how an immunity law works, and that facts can be in dispute. However thank you for the links. |
|
November 9, 2017, 08:21 PM | #86 | |||||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
But folks like OldMarksman, Spats McGee, Bartholomew Roberts and others who post here don't pontificate on self defense law. They have studied the subject extensively and have appropriate education and experience in the legal world. They can provide solid and useful information for those who are serious about improving their understanding of the subject. There is actually less difference among the large majority of States than one might think. Most have done away with, one way or another, the duty to retreat, although a few still recognize and enforce it. Most States also have some form of Castle Doctrine and recognize useful evidentiary presumptions when a person against whom force is used has forcibly and unlawfully broken into someone's home and the defender knows or has a reasonable belief that has happened. Indeed the language of most Castle Doctrine statutes is remarkably similar. But a significant characteristic of self defense law, which most people don't appreciate, is the way a self defense plea turns the presumption of innocence on its head. When one claims self defense he effectively admits to committing acts which are the elements of a crime -- he intentionally committed acts of violence against another human. Several years ago a lawyer by the name of Lisa Steele wrote an excellent article for lawyers on defending a self defense case. The article was entitled "Defending a Self Defense Case" and published in the March, 2007, edition of the journal of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, The Champion. It was republished in four parts, with permission, on the website, Truth About Guns. The article as republished can be read here: Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; and Part 4. As Ms. Steele explains the unique character of a self defense case in Part 1: This affects the evidentiary burdens of the parties. In court the parties have their respective burdens of (1) production (producing evidence); (2) proof; and (3) persuasion:
In most cases the substantive rules, i. e., when the use of force against another person may be justified, are roughly similar in all State. Texas law provides for the justification of a use of force is somewhat broader circumstances (but not a broad as some think). The differences are usually in the details and the procedures in court. One particularly advantageous characteristic of Florida law is the availability of a preliminary, evidentiary hearing on justification. A finding of justification concludes the matter in the defendant's favor. If the finding is adverse, the defendant may still raise self defense at trial. Quote:
As we often say, "You don't ask, 'Can I shoot?', you ask, 'Must I shoot to save innocent life?'" Avoidance will in general be the best course, if it can be done without harm to innocents, even if retreat isn't legally required.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|||||
November 11, 2017, 02:52 AM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
|
Once again, thank you Frank Ettin, for your very thorough and informative post.
It does bring up one question; given the amount of time and effort it obviously takes to keep the Legal forum on this site (as well as on THR and any other sites to which you contribute) straight, how do you have time to make a living practicing law? |
November 11, 2017, 11:44 AM | #88 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper Last edited by Frank Ettin; November 11, 2017 at 01:17 PM. Reason: Clean up grammar |
|
November 11, 2017, 03:58 PM | #89 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
|
Only that which force is reasonably necessary. If I were stabbed, I think seventeen stabs on my opponent is reasonable if that 's what it took to get him to stop resisting.
Part of the strategy of these lawsuits is not to win but to seek an out of court settlement. Plaintiff's attorney wins for the bluff. Defendant eats the loss.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
November 11, 2017, 08:14 PM | #90 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Quote:
He felt it is much easier to convince a GJ that you didn't shoot them to much than club them to much! But yes, since unless you aim for the jugular/throat, which is just where I do, and I have taken defensive knife courses that extol all kinds of hamstringing cuts that are supposed to disable an attacker, then you will find you many very well need to stab someone many times to get the effects you wish for. That is an immediate stop of hostilities. Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
|
November 12, 2017, 08:13 AM | #91 | ||
Staff
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
|
Quote:
To defend, yes. But to continue to hold an unarmed man, and to continue to stab him in the back.... Quote:
And both the fact of a settlement and the amount remains confidential. |
||
November 12, 2017, 04:00 PM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,934
|
None of you chaps knows how to fight? Starbucks has lots of impromptu weapons, chairs, stools. That kind of stuff. Pick up a stool, smack knifer Guy, across the mouth, back of the neck, side of the head, etc. Like you were striking to the wall!
Wear sues, so you can kick, not too high. Front of shins, knees. Not flip-flops. Swipe someones red-hot coffee, right in his face, the whole place has weapons. Or do what I do, carry always! |
November 12, 2017, 08:55 PM | #93 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
We're discussing an actual incident. In that incident, the a citizen stopped a robber's aggression by taking the robber's knife away from him and stabbing the robber. That's what happened. Now we're discussing the citizen's legal situation given the actual facts of the incident.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
November 12, 2017, 09:16 PM | #94 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 1, 2017
Posts: 391
|
Wouldn't it boil down to determining at which point the robber stopped being a threat?
|
November 12, 2017, 09:48 PM | #95 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,453
|
Quote:
Deaf
__________________
“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides |
|
November 13, 2017, 12:23 AM | #96 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
||
November 13, 2017, 05:18 AM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 29, 2005
Location: Orlando FL
Posts: 1,934
|
It might be not a direct discussion Frank. But the whole premise of wrestling with a man holding a sharp? Is outlandish to me! Getting away with stabbing someone 17 times, and calling it self-defence. Bit of a stretch?
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|