Man attacked by robber, fights back, is charged with murder

reply to post by chishuppu

The only place it is acceptable to kill somebody while they are moving away from you is in the military.

I got out and got past the conditioning and realized it was wrong even then.

Too many people CANNOT honestly even try to see things through the eyes of another or even consider they may be walking in another's shoes like the guy in the tow truck should have done.

If a lot of you think death is a fair penalty for mistakes made, the fact that public opinion is considered in the making of law really scares the bejesus outta me.

I don't live in Elysium, I am so far beneath that I am above.

MyHappyDogShiner
reply to post by chishuppu

 

Too many people CANNOT honestly even try to see things through the eyes of another or even consider they may be walking in another's shoes like the guy in the tow truck should have done.

What? The guy was attacked. Why should he put himself in the other guy's shoes when he was minding his own business?

If a lot of you think death is a fair penalty for mistakes made, the fact that public opinion is considered in the making of law really scares the bejesus outta me.

I don't know what's so scary about good people being given all the protections possible under law while evil people can be dealt with with extreme prejudice. It may be scary to you but that is exactly the world I would love to live in.

Benevolent Heretic

I HAVE been in a fight. And I have been raped. I never killed anyone.

I have been in many not "A" fights and although I was never raped, When I was 2 or 3 a man broke into my home and violently raped my mother while my dad was out....I am 36 now and throughout my life I have had "flashbacks" of the incident clear as day, to this day....I don't pretend to imagine what it is like for her..nor would I for you..regarding rape, I can't picture a scenario that society shouldn't back you if you did kill the attacker, it should be entirely your choice. The second the "attacker" forced his/her will onto you, he/she put their life into your hands. IMO the only right answer is the one that leaves you standing at the end of the day, but what you do with it became up to you the second he/she forced you that choice and remains with you until the incident is over. And by over that means either law enforment can take over or the threat is gone.

MyHappyDogShiner

Too many people CANNOT honestly even try to see things through the eyes of another or even consider they may be walking in another's shoes like the guy in the tow truck should have done.

I think this highlights MyHappys experience in making split second decisions.

crzayfool

woogleuk
If someone was to pull a gun on me...

Bull# - You have stated you are a Brit. You don't know how to handle this.

You don't know anything about me.

I was walking the streets of West Cumbria the day Derrick Bird was driving around shooting people, including an old college friend of mine. I, like most other people round here remained calm. Cumbria is the country, a lot of people own firearms, and not just the farmers.

I have had firearm training, and how to deal with a confrontational situation.

Just because I am a Brit doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about in these regards.

reply to post by swimmer15

I can think that fast, it's action that gets one into trouble.

Fear and adrenaline are hard things to get control of, I have known how to use them to my advantage for many years.

The guy got into the truck, started it up and put into gear, steered it toward a man and intentionally ran him down and killed him.

I really don't think it was a reflex action.

one less robber, i would have done the same, more then once.

reply to post by andy1972

That's true, but wont legally hold up in a court of law. Trucker loses. He could've removed himself, and the court would ask him why he didn't when at that point...he had the upper hand and could have.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Well, don't count me in with that crowd of gun owners.

You cant use force like that even if youre getting hit or slapped. Law says only with equal force used against you to remove the treat. And you cant chase anyone down either...that would turn the tables as in this case that you are now the offender...with the upper hand.

He could have fled. And should have.

Thanks

MyHappyDogShiner
reply to post by swimmer15

 

I can think that fast, it's action that gets one into trouble.

Fear and adrenaline are hard things to get control of, I have known how to use them to my advantage for many years.

The guy got into the truck, started it up and put into gear, steered it toward a man and intentionally ran him down and killed him.

I really don't think it was a reflex action.

I agree with your point about they get you in trouble... Ok thats some wisdom from experience... It should be too that if everyone could hold there composure in critical situations, there would be no need for people like me. And navy seals would never be "undermanned".. Accidents would never happen.
I dont expect average person to react a certain way in crisis. And i do not agree with making a criminal out of somone who does not react like me. If you really do have any experiance in these type of scenarios than even you know that even the very best pray that it all goes well, because in your gut you know from experience it takes very little to go bad. I will never place fault on a person forced with violence by another into a decision.
We can look at it with all the would have should haves or look at it like it is... Bad guy picked the wrong victim.

cross21
Alright first post.
Anyone remember Gandhi?

The guy who refused to let his wife take penicillin (because his opposition of modern medicine) causing her to die from a simple infection, yet took quinine to save his own life?
That Gandhi? Yeah, we remember him.
Gandhi valued his life more than his wife's and lacked the courage of his convictions.
Something tells me that Gandhi, given the choice, would choose his life over a pistol whipping robber's.

reply to post by swimmer15

Im not qualified . A judge in a court of law would ask all these questions.

Though Ive certified in lethal force self defense...Im just relating what was taught.

In many instances like this and as Ive mentioned...it becomes a case where the victim becomes the aggressor...and can pay for that legally. That's all. And you and I aren't there. And only a judge can decide fault.

Thanks

Some of our opinions are based on experience, some on schooling, others on law.

Let me say just this: None of us were there, and all we have are our own opinions. Some have experience in this, others have not. Its what the COURTS will decide that is important.

In court...no matter what we all think..is what stands. And there are clear legal definitions of what constitutes "self defense" and "assault".

And the tables can turn on a dime around where now legally, the aggressor was once the victim, and has to be careful when and if he/she tries to retaliate.

"Self-defense", "Assault" and "Retaliation" all have difference definitions, both opinions and legal.

Its the "legal" ones that put us in...or keep us out of... prison.

Thanks!

I was a victim of a brutal assault a long time ago, not one but two assailants attacked me, one with a steel bar smashing my head and face up but I had the know how to fight back during the attack and I hurt one of them pretty good.

So what happened? no charges, I was told because I had fought back they would be pressing charges on me so I stood there and asked the judge the question:

"So what you're law is saying is that I should have done nothing and allowed them to kill me and I should be dead right now according to the doctors...$%@%T's"

The judge apologised and said that it was the law so I had to leave it at that.

Was this guys reaction over the top? NO.

The other fella had a gun in his hand, regardless of whether he was distracted or not, he had the gun in his hand so he was still a high threat and this guy was fuelled by shock, adrenaline and rage.

What his action wrong, yes but was his reaction over the top, no because he was in an incredibly traumatic situation.

reply to post by mysterioustranger


Im not arguing that. My point is,The criminal justice system is just that... For Criminals. Not creating them. This creates an atmosphere where good people who want to do the right thing and may be in a position to save lives, reluctant to act.

And we let these guys bring up charges on the use of deadly force....

investigations.nbcnews.com...
Are they guilty until proven innocent? Would they have used deadly force?

in this case. He was attacked, with a weapon and the attacker was never off the scene. All i need to know, No multi million dollar circus needed. And no one deserves the right to judge his perception of a threat, its clear cut the threat was there and it wasnt him. Only way i see to bring this man on charges is prove he instigated the incident.

reply to post by mysterioustranger

mysterioustranger
Well, don't count me in with that crowd of gun owners.

I absolutely don't. There are still some responsible owners, I know that for a fact.

reply to post by swimmer15

I couldn't agree with you more. Its a tough one here. Legally tough.

And we both know the courts may or may not...no matter how passionate we are here with our defensive taking opinions...its not those opinions that will keep us out of jail. It would be legal interpretation of the law...by judges elected, appointed or paid to interpret the law.

In many ways yes. The law favors the criminal.

Unfortunately, unless the attacker was continuing his assault, you can't jump in a car and run him over. Second Degree sounds right. Hopefully, he gets some kind of unsupervised probation but I'd seriously think about leaving the area as this guys homies will probably be looking for him and if he does end up dead, it probably won't make the local 6 PM news.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Thanks for that. What makes it a shame? Is that I have to even CARRY a firearm. And if I DO use it...I have to make damn sure I have a legal right to use it in that instance, so I keep my butt out of jail.

Again, "self-defense" and "assault" after an attack can quickly become "retaliation" when there was an apparent lessening of the threat...decided by a judge or jury.

I do think everyone should take a basic self defense class or two or 3...to understand the legal ramifications of one using it...and when not to HAVE to.

Thanks again!

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Add this to the growing list of what's f'd up about this country!

reply to post by intrepid


People are likely to act the wake of strong human emotion, you know, right when the adrenaline is pumping. While you're citing the laws, this man is fighting and may not have a clue. The robber robbed a man who he thought would give in, ok. He's dead now. The only thing this man is a victim of is man's unpredictability. While you're lawfully just, which is fine, the robber acted in a manner of deadly force, and was met with such.

Odd, In addition to the fate of this robber, the law cannot facilitate a deceased reoffender, omit all human emotion in the case, charge him with second degree murder, they still get their criminal, right? Maybe I'll remember you intrepid when I'm being robbed, hopefully when I'm shot all to hell you'll write up a thread with compassion.