The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: DGF on August 06, 2011, 03:15:31 PM
-
I know we have talked about this subject in the past. But it has never been satisfactorily settled in my mind. I am seventy years old, and carrying. My wife and I have just left the Wisconsin State fair when we are attacked with fists by a mob of 20 or 30 juveniles. What do we do? Shoot one of the kids? Fire into the air and hope we scare them? I can guarantee you I will not stand by and allow my wife to be injured but I don't know what to do. I don't want to spend the rest of my life in prison. At my age even a short sentence could be a life sentence. The scenario that I have outlined is fictitious as we do not live in Wisconsin but the same thing could happen here in Virginia.
Crime & Courts
Hundreds Rampage Through Neighborhoods Surrounding Wisconsin State Fair
Published August 06, 2011
| FoxNews.com
Print Email Share Comments
Milwaukee and West Allis Police are investigating a string of mob-like behavior involving a very large and unruly crowd near the Wisconsin State Fair Crowds Thursday night.
Milwaukee police officers are investigating a string of mob-like actions involving a very large and unruly crowd near the Wisconsin State Fair Thursday night, where several people were badly injured and cars and homes were rampaged, Fox6 News reported.
Twenty-four people were arrested inside the fairgrounds after fights broke out, State Fair officials said. The violence continued after closing time outside the park.
State Fair Park CEO Rick Frenette said seven park police officers were injured, including two who were taken to the hospital.
Milwaukee Police said just after 11 p.m. they responded to complaints of an unruly mob attacking cars, people and leaving damage in its path.
Hundreds of young people left the fairgrounds and made their way down to the surrounding neighborhoods, smashing car windows, throwing rocks and beating people who were leaving the fair.
Several people were punched in the face, a child was pushed to the ground, one woman required stitches and another will need surgery for her injuries.
Police are continuing to search for suspects involved in the incident.
One witness said he saw a group of 20-30 young men attack someone walking by.
"A group came through and the guy was kind of not really looking and was making his way through the crowd like anybody else would, and just wound up on his knees and they wound up punching him," the witness said.
"I had one kid you know asking me to sit on my porch until it cleared up because he was afraid to walk by himself."
Witnesses described the mobs as young African American teens. Milwaukee Aldermen Bob Donovan and Joe Dudzik released a bold statement on Friday about what they called a "deteriorating African American culture in our city," Fox 6 News reported.
Frenette said there will be an increased police presence following disturbances at the fair and surrounding neighborhood. Frenette added that all of those under 18 attending the fair will have to be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian after 5 p.m.
Click here for more information on the rampages that took place around the Wisconsin State Fair.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/06/hundreds-rampage-through-neighborhoods-surrounding-wisconsin-state-fair/#ixzz1UHTMVYYp
-
I would shoot. Being attacked by 20 -30 unarmed juv's is a life threatening situation. I would defend my wife and myself.
Pecos
-
As Rob Pincus has stated many times, The critical dynamic incident, and what to do.
Certainly, a violent "flash mob", whether kids (which I am sure there were some adults also),..makes no difference. These are not little 9- 10 year old punks you just kick in the ass and push out of the way.
The bottom line is "Did you believe you and your spouse were in imminent danger of bodily harm?" "Were you and your spouse directly threatened and feared for your life?"
If the real answer is yes.
You defend you and your family to STOP THE THREAT.
Time to post a reminder.
I don't carry a gun to kill people. I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don't carry a gun to scare people. I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.
I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid. I carry a gun because there are real threats in this world.
I don't carry a gun because I am evil. I carry a gun because I've lived long enough to see the evil in the world.
I don't carry a gun because I hate the government. I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don't carry a gun because I'm angry. I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don't carry a gun because my sex organs are too small. I carry a gun because I want to continue to use those sex organs for the purpose they were intended for a good long time to come.
I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone. I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man. I carry a gun because a real man knows how to take care and protect their property, themselves and the ones they love.
I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate. I carry a gun because unarmed and facing armed thugs I am inadequate.
I don't carry a gun because I love it. I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
I don't carry a gun to shoot to kill someone. I carry a gun and would shoot as necessary to stay alive. If the assailant dies as a result of a desire to harm me, it's no loss to society.
OBTW, judged by 12 than carried by 6 comes to mind.....A gang of punks (20-30+) stomping you or your wife's head in is a justifiable reason to defend yourself.
-
Burn the little bastards down and make sure they never get up again.
At seventy, do you really think a jury is going to convict you of a crime? That mean ol man and his frail wife were pickin on those studly teens and twentysomethings. What prosecutor is going to make himself look stupid persecuting a senior citizen who was attacked by a GROUP of youtz?
If any are minors, sue their parents for lack of supervision and lack of moral values.
-
I forgot...Your 70?
"Never pick a fight with an "old man", if he's too old to fight, he'll just shoot you."
P.S. What CJ said...
-
In the scenario you present. "A gang of 20-30 vs 2"!
I'd certainly like to think I had enough situational awareness to see the problem coming, and was ready to draw. But THE SECOND the first fist made contact with either myself or her. I promise you at least that kid won't be making it home that day. How the others react would very quickly determine their fates as well.
I frankly don't give a rats fuzzy a$$ if their "kids". They lost all privileged treatment as such the moment they became hostile. Lets face it. Unless your in an all out EOTW scenario, only teenagers would ever behave in such a way. You'd better be mentally and physically prepared to do the right thing!
-
Merely asking the question denotes no time served in the military. This is well covered in basic training, with the correct action being thoroughly implanted in your mind. Hesitation = a dead soldier. "Dieing for a cause" is what you are there to ensure your enemy does. Not you. Your job is to... (anyone care to finish for me? ;D )
-
How do you react to that situation ?
It's simple.
Front sight, press, repeat as needed.
-
Your concern should not be whether to shoot or not, but which one to shoot first.
-
ALL OF THE ABOVE.
-
" The bottom line is "Did you believe you and your spouse were in imminent danger of bodily harm?" "Were you and your spouse directly threatened and feared for your life?"
If the real answer is yes.
You defend you and your family to STOP THE THREAT.'
Yes, and I agree with that and what most of you have recomended. Were I by myself in that situation I might be willing to take a few punches rather than killing one of the little dears. As I said however I would not allow my wife to be injured. In reading the article it is clear that most of the injuries were superficial with the exception of one unnamed that required surgery. That certainly would be used against you in court. "These were just a bunch of high spirited youngsters that got a little out of hand but didn't deserve to be shot by some gun toting white man."
BTW, I served in the Army, 3rd Batt 84th Arty as a surveyor/forward observer. My TO&E weapons were the 1911 colt 45, the M-14 and the M79 grenade launcher. I really liked the M79.
-
Merely asking the question denotes no time served in the military. This is well covered in basic training, with the correct action being thoroughly implanted in your mind. Hesitation = a dead soldier. "Dieing for a cause" is what you are there to ensure your enemy does. Not you. Your job is to... (anyone care to finish for me? ;D )
BTW, I served in the Army, 3rd Batt 84th Arty as a surveyor/forward observer. My TO&E weapons were the 1911 colt 45, the M-14 and the M79 grenade launcher. I really liked the M79.
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=16986.0
Good going BM, we have a Contessa Brewer moment here on our own forum............
-
Well DGF, given the ramifications that the Gov. of WI. is calling State Troopers to maintain order at the fair, and the targets of the mob were white, these are mitigating factors should you find yourself in a similar threat.
One cannot be afraid of legal ramifications, when your life in is in imminent peril. As you are a Veteran, an older and wiser gentleman, a family man, and found yourself approached by a gang of thugs, hell bent on injury, (the superficial nature of the injuries, I will not bet my life on), regardless of their age, those will work against the punks...and most likely get you a pro bono lawyer from the SAF.
Virginia as I recall, as a former Fairfax County Resident, does remain a pro-gun, state.
"Arms in the hands of citizens (may) be used at individual discretion...in private self defense..."
John Adams, A defense of the Constitutions of the Government of the USA, 471 (1788).
All the best, and thank you for your service.
tw
-
you gotta defend yourself.
And think...if this mob gets away with mild damage to someone, that only encourages them to go further next time.
-
Being attacked by 20 or 30 hamsters could be lethal. Teen age hoodlums ? If you have the ability, but don't shoot some of them you deserve what you get.
-
I do agree that you have to protect yourself and your family. I would much rather meet these punks here in Virginia than in Wisconsin. But I still worry about everyone scattering and me standing over a dead 15 year old by myself.
Two or so years ago a man and his wife were walking for exercise in their neighborhood here in Northern Virginia. This is a neighborhood of million dollar houses. The husband is retired CIA. It is evening, and a van pulls up along side of this couple and four young thugs get out and attack this elderly couple. They beat the husband to death and beat the wife so badly that she was in a coma for months. She did eventually recover but with lasting injuries. This was in a "safe" neighborhood. This happened only a few miles from where I live. It turns out that this attack was a gang initiation and the perps are in the Loudon County jail awaiting trial. Had the husband been armed the result might have been much different.
I seldom leave the house without a weapon, but it is a heavy burden. The streets of Northern Virginia or the streets of Wisconsin are not combat free fire zones and what we were taught in the military does not apply. It is a fine line we walk.
-
Honestly. I'd rather spend the rest of my life in prison, if it came to that, then laying on the pavement having my spleen and other organs ruptured by this mob kicking me to death.
-
All of the above BUT ask yourself before leaving the house "am I about to do stupid things with stupid people in stupid places" this is on of MB's mantras and I observe it constantly. I understand that here in central Texas I'm insulated, for now, from what occurs in the Big City but I wouldn't go to a State Fair/WaterWorld Park......name a place where dumb people go in crowds, for a pension.
MP
-
It's been covered well by others, but I just feel the need to add my two-cents.
Race is irrelevant.
Age is irrelevant.
Threaten me or Bunny, and your next conversation is with St.Peter. 'splain to him why you're there.
Ah'm jus' sayin'...
Crusader Rabbit
-
I have to agree with the overall sentiment here: If you feel that your life or the life of a loved one is in endangered, that is all that matters.
As far as youngsters go, combatants are combatants. In a previous life I had a shop chief almost killed when he was swarmed by a school (think piranhas) of 10-12 year old Filipino kids. He could not fight "kids."
-
I do agree that you have to protect yourself and your family. I would much rather meet these punks here in Virginia than in Wisconsin. But I still worry about everyone scattering and me standing over a dead 15 year old by myself.
Just make sure you kill more than one.
-
I don't care if it's 8 year old girls, If they attack you at least some should wind up cooling on the ground.
-
I'm at a total loss how anyone who was in so much as cub scouts would hesitate to remove the threat in that situation... :-\
As far as everyone scattering and leaving you standing over a dead kid (which I honestly have no doubt would happen)... Just make sure you put the gun back in it's holster before the cops show up! And kick the little F'er in the head a good one before they get there to be sure he's dead.
I grew out of touchy feelyness a looooonnnng time ago.
Tom's right. If she somehow poses a threat to my family, a little girl carrying a box of kittens is no different than Hodgy with an RPG.
Never liked cats anyway! ;)
-
One thing nobody has taken into account here is this: As I understand it, while Wisconsin recently passed a "Shall Issue" law, it is not yet in effect, and there are currently no laws allowing concealed carry in that state. As a result, at this point in time it wouldn't be the shooting of the violent little bastards that would get you prison time, but simply the act of carrying the instrument of your defense itself.
That being said, the scenario, as originally described, brings to mind the scene from Tombstone where Wyatt Earp (with the muzzle of his gun against Ike Clanton's forehead) utters the line, "You're not as stupid as you look Ike."
-
DGF no doubt you are a moral and considerate person. You want to do the right thing. I'm 55 now and I would ask that you contemplate that there has been a paradign shift in the morality of the nation.
You obviously do not want to violate the law which is commendable.
There was a belief in the law establishing boundaries and from that, somehow, protection for the populace.
I also would bet that you are willing to lay your life down for your wife and family. No questions asked, fair exchange.
The respect for the law is so ingrained in us, so supplanted by media and policiticans, that we may exchange that which is good and precious for an ideal that is at times out-of-place. If I believe my wife or children are in lethal danger from a mob I will serve the time or face the executioner through the legal system. That is to say my sacrifice is to subject myself to the law and collect the result in exchange for protecting my family. It is similar to laying down one's life for their family but in a different context.
You should ask the question of yourself, "Was I constrained by a normally upright respect of the law to such an extent that I would have jepordized or sacrficed my wife in exchange for avoiding violation of a law that does not morally apply to this situation and that will be used against me? Would I fail to act in the best interest of my familly to avoid prosecution (not that you are "scared of prosectuion, but that it is a act of law violation) and in that exchange the life of a family member to be politically and or legally correct under the law?"
This is not a logic path that my parent's generation had to consider. It is, however, the moral dilema which someone faces every day in this nation which is, sadly, no longer the wonderful nation which you grew up in.
-
I think we are talking about a complex situation here, not one that goes Threat-Bang. We are talking about a situation where even a police officer could not apply deadly force. If a police officer killed an unarmed assailant, with some exceptions, he would probably be facing a jury, and likely some prison time. Even in the common, " HE REACHED FOR HIS WAISTBAND" scenario he is on very shaky ground. When was the last time you saw riot police draw their weapons and shoot rioters, even when faced with rocks and bottles?
We are all different in our ability to assess a threat. I may react sooner than some of you or vice/versa. Some of the nervous persuasion may even react way before necessary. It is where the rubber hits the road that I am concerned with. Bernard Goetz was charged with murder and several other serious charges. A favorable jury found him not guilty because the guys he shot had long rap sheets and were admittedly on their way to commit robbery. And they were threatening not only Bernard but other subway passengers.
Lets now take another look at Bernard. Four black kids get on the subway, they are loud and their behavior could easily be construed as threatening. They are dressed like thugs. Bernard shoots them after he feels threatened. It turns out that these kids have no police records, they are currently attending school, and they claim that they were listening to music on their IPods and not threatening anyone but singing along to some rap music. Music that had threatening lyrics. Bernard might well be still serving his prison sentence.
I might shoot an 8year old girl with a box of kittens if this were Nam and smoke was pouring out of the butt of one of the kittens. But its not. It does boil down to what would I do. As I have said, no one will injure my wife in my presence, so yes, I would do whatever is necessary to protect her including deadly force. But there may be some very severe consequences tied to my decision. I would like to see MB tackle this question on TBD.
-
Great discussion here.
But here is how it looks from my point of view.
The moral issue is: If I feel threatened, I will defend myself with deadly force, and not feel guilt.
The legal issue: A jury might not see it as self defense and find me guilty of some form of assault, manslaughter or murder charge.
The resolution (for me): If I truly felt threatened as I mentioned in the Moral issue, I would believe that if I don't defend myself I will end up dead or, through luck, only severely injured. If I even consider not defending myself because of what the legal consequences might be, perhaps I don't feel all that threatened after all.
I read some pointers about home defense. The thing to say to the Officer is "He said he was going to kill me and I believed him". Well, if I truly believe they are going to harm me, I will act. If not I will attempt to withdraw until I am safe or cornered with no resort but to defend myself.
In any case, if i believe the threat of death or severe harm is imminent, I will defend myself and hope my skill is enough that I will live to defend myself in court if it comes to that.
There is no doubt that a when a flash mob harasses someone, it is not to give them a good laugh or warm feeling, it is to bully them, frighten them and make them feel threatened. If they do a good job of it, they pay the consequences no matter what their true limits might have been.
-
Here it is a mute point about carrying at the fairgrounds as they did have metal detectors one year. Not sure if they still do but it was like going through airport security due to past shootings and gang fights.
I don't go to the fair because I know I can't carry.
I couldn't even get in with my dog when I tried a few yrs back. So I've never gone back.
-
DGF:
1. You must be a "reluctant participant;" You didn't look for or instigate the situation.
2. You must be reasonably in immediate fear of "death or great bodily harm;" The "reasonable man" would be fearful of death or debilitating bodily harm as a result of the continuing situation.
3. No lesser force will serve, making deadly force necessary; You have no choice but to deploy the weapon or actions you chose for the given threat.
4. Retreat is not practical; Back to #1 - You chose to not be in this situation, and you can neither defuse the situation or walk away from it.
From the standards for the use of deadly force or potentially use of deadly force in the State of Minnesota submitted with no further comment.
Ok, one comment:
Never draw, display or deploy* a weapon unless you intend to use it to its fullest intent - shoot to kill, stab or cut to kill or disable, spray pepper spray to incapacitate.
*Showing a weapon, displaying a weapon, threatening with or about a weapon, or firing a gun into the air.
-
" 2. You must be reasonably in immediate fear of "death or great bodily harm;" The "reasonable man" would be fearful of death or debilitating bodily harm as a result of the continuing situation."
This is what I'm talking about. What if I am only in fear of being punched in the mouth or pushed or kicked. Certainly those could cause debilitating bodily harm but they would not be easily defended in court without stretching the truth. How much superficial damage ( non debilitating badly harm) would you allow an assailant to inflict on you before you resorted to deadly force? What if they slapped you? There is an entire gamut of things that could escalate up to deadly force. Someone running past you body checking you into fence or a parked car, or someone taunting you, spitting on you, any number of maddening actions that would make you want to shoot someone. What if they called you names and said they were going to kick your ass? What if they surrounded you and threw dog crap at you? These things happen during mob actions. Police officers have to put up with it in every riot they respond to.
In all those scenarios I have outlined I would feel greatly threatened, particularly if my wife were with me, but would that be enough to shoot someone.
I kind of agree with the no brandishing of weapons. I say kind of because I have a close friend that was involved in a road rage incident where the other driver got out of his car with a billyclub in his hand, and started to approach my friends car. My friend stepped out of his car and put his revolver in the holster on his belt , he had the pistol in a holster in the car, when the other driver saw the pistol being put into the holster he got back in his car and drove off. Is that brandishing?
-
"What if I am only in fear of being punched in the mouth or pushed or kicked."
I'm 51 years old and I could kick a person to death with out working up much of a sweat. I could kill with a variety of single punches, and I'm not particularly highly trained.
Your 70, a good cussing could induce a fatal heart attack.
You have to survive to be effected by consequences.
Get your priorities straight.
-
" 2. You must be reasonably in immediate fear of "death or great bodily harm;" The "reasonable man" would be fearful of death or debilitating bodily harm as a result of the continuing situation."
This is what I'm talking about. What if I am only in fear of being punched in the mouth or pushed or kicked. Certainly those could cause debilitating bodily harm but they would not be easily defended in court without stretching the truth. How much superficial damage ( non debilitating badly harm) would you allow an assailant to inflict on you before you resorted to deadly force?
We all have our own line in the sand, and that can change from day to day. Just had back surgery? You are now very debilitated until you heal up. In 3 months you may be feeling fine.
Punched by one person is one thing, punched by 3 or 10 is a whole 'nother ball game. Disparity of force, whether by size of the assailant or numbers of BGs is not an unknown to the legal system.
I have a close friend that was involved in a road rage incident where the other driver got out of his car with a billyclub in his hand, and started to approach my friends car. My friend stepped out of his car and put his revolver in the holster on his belt , he had the pistol in a holster in the car, when the other driver saw the pistol being put into the holster he got back in his car and drove off. Is that brandishing?
Not in my state and I'm sure many others. That is a response to a deadly weapon being displayed by someone else.
-
Of course, I would ask why your friend didn't just drive away. He chose to put himself in the situation with the billyclub (unless there are omitted details that say otherwise.)
-
Tom, I may not be as frail as you might think, I believe I could still absorb a bit of punishment, I may even still be able to dish out a bit.
This Flash Mob thing is a relatively new phenomenon. Several stores in this area have been looted by flash mobs of juveniles. Unless there happens to be a squad of policemen handy there is nothing the store owner can do other than hope the security cameras will be able to help capture them later. He certainly cannot shoot them.
It not like the cut and dried self defense situations we are accustomed to. Kick in my front door and enter my house and Threat-Bang. Attempt to mug me or car jack me and Threat-Bang. Pull a knife and Threat-Bang. I would really like to see MB tackle this problem, include his lawyers and explore the possibilities.
What do you do when you see a mob of kids running towards you at full speed and you for some reason cannot get out of their way? Do you start shooting or do you let them run over you? That certainly would be a situation where you could fear a debilitating injury.
-
" Of course, I would ask why your friend didn't just drive away. He chose to put himself in the situation with the billyclub (unless there are omitted details that say otherwise.)"
There are omitted details. They happened to be in traffic and my friend was unable to drive off the other car was able to turn a corner and disappear.
-
Tom, I may not be as frail as you might think, I believe I could still absorb a bit of punishment, I may even still be able to dish out a bit.
This Flash Mob thing is a relatively new phenomenon. Several stores in this area have been looted by flash mobs of juveniles. Unless there happens to be a squad of policemen handy there is nothing the store owner can do other than hope the security cameras will be able to help capture them later. He certainly cannot shoot them.
It not like the cut and dried self defense situations we are accustomed to. Kick in my front door and enter my house and Threat-Bang. Attempt to mug me or car jack me and Threat-Bang. Pull a knife and Threat-Bang. I would really like to see MB tackle this problem, include his lawyers and explore the possibilities.
What do you do when you see a mob of kids running towards you at full speed and you for some reason cannot get out of their way? Do you start shooting or do you let them run over you? That certainly would be a situation where you could fear a debilitating injury.
If I may, I STRONGLY suggest you remove from your thought pattern that "kids" deserve any special / more delicate handling. Teenagers always have been, and always will be testing what they can get away with, and will push and push until someone pushes back. In a civilized society, who do you suppose "Public Enemy #1" really is? Who's committing more crimes than anyone else? Because they KNOW they'll get "special treatment", and get away with anything they want with most people!
When I first meet any of my teenagers male friends I enjoy nonchalantly working into conversation how easy it is to permanently cripple or kill someone without leaving visible marks... We always seem to get along just fine after that! Lots of "Yes Sir"s, "No Sir"s. ;)
-
Tom, I may not be as frail as you might think, I believe I could still absorb a bit of punishment, I may even still be able to dish out a bit.
This Flash Mob thing is a relatively new phenomenon. Several stores in this area have been looted by flash mobs of juveniles. Unless there happens to be a squad of policemen handy there is nothing the store owner can do other than hope the security cameras will be able to help capture them later. He certainly cannot shoot them.
It not like the cut and dried self defense situations we are accustomed to. Kick in my front door and enter my house and Threat-Bang. Attempt to mug me or car jack me and Threat-Bang. Pull a knife and Threat-Bang. I would really like to see MB tackle this problem, include his lawyers and explore the possibilities.
What do you do when you see a mob of kids running towards you at full speed and you for some reason cannot get out of their way? Do you start shooting or do you let them run over you? That certainly would be a situation where you could fear a debilitating injury.
If you do wind up in court I hope your smart enough to play that down. ;D
Joking aside, being 70 is an "aggravating condition" same as if you were gay, or black.
There are enhanced penalties because the law assumes you are less mobile, bones more brittle, other medical conditions etc.
And yes it is cut and dried, numbers are a weapon in themselves.
MB did address this a few months ago, talking about the guy in NY with 30 MS-13 supporters on his lawn yelling threats.
He fired an AK into the ground, and they took him to jail. (He was recently acquitted )
Even Mike Janich is not going to win hand to hand with 15 or 20 teens.
After further thought I will add that it is exactly the same as the Army trained you for.
The goal is to die in bed of old age.
-
I think we are talking about a complex situation here, not one that goes Threat-Bang. We are talking about a situation where even a police officer could not apply deadly force. If a police officer killed an unarmed assailant, with some exceptions, he would probably be facing a jury, and likely some prison time.
<snip>
I would like to see MB tackle this question on TBD.
The first portion still boils down to, do you think your life or family's life is threatened. To put it bluntly, the decision is on you there is no magic formula for this situation. Shooting someone to avoid an ass whipping is not justified...but as enunciated by other's here some states, like Oklahoma, make an allowance for age and/or physical condition.
For me it really is a simple threat bang...you must assess if what you face is a deadly threat. If my wife, for instance, is facing a deadly threat then it is bang until the threat is gone and go through the system because I will be held accountable. If I would need to shoot because life is threatened, then I will shoot and submit myself to the legal system. I know that if I hesitate from a mob threat I may get to watch my loved one die horrible death and be urinated on by 10 or 15 hoodlums. Ugly, but I have seen gangs in action and the results..no scars on my part but on friends who were not aware of their environment.
MB did tackle this on a podcast a few weeks ago. You can glean much from his podcasts. He was quite clear in his estimation, not a legal estimation, that a mob by virtue of a mob is a lethal threat. I agree with him 100%.
http://www.downrange.tv/blog/down-range-radio-220-mob-violence/10511/ (http://www.downrange.tv/blog/down-range-radio-220-mob-violence/10511/)
I think you have decided to not shoot until violence has been transferred to you or your wife in the form of physical contact.
-
(http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww40/BigCheeseStick/McDonnalds.jpg?t=1312772524)
-
It is not my responsibility to "take a beating" from anyone no matter how well I might be able to absorb the punishment regardless of what age, sex, race or creed or national origin they may be.
Ohio has a "brandishing" law and if the intent of a charging mob wasn't perfectly clear, within the law I could place my hand upon my unexposed weapon and let the mob know they were threatening me and that should they come closer, I'd defend myself.
Further, I'd risk the brandishing charge should the mob continue to close by presenting my weapon and repeating my warning, if there was time. Firing a round safely into the ground might help, but it might hurt in court, portrayed as a reckless act.
It is not in my abilities to read the minds of the members of the mob and discern their true intent. If I believe they are threatening me and lethal force is needed for my self protection, I will use it and do so with moral certainty. I'll face the legal consequences, if any, after I've survived the threat.
If you are not sure of the extent of the violent intentions of a charging mob, you are free to risk life and limb to give them the benefit of the doubt and avoid the legal consequences. I'd discuss it with your wife, though, to be sure she is just as willing to get kicked and beaten and maybe killed for the sake of not misunderstanding the exuberant youths.
-
"charging mob" pretty much says it all. Would we be satisfied if they wore shirts saying "We're gonna kick your azz" ?
-
"charging mob" pretty much says it all. Would we be satisfied if they wore shirts saying "We're gonna kick your azz" ?
They might get a by if they were all dressed in Marathon Race T's and shorts....and I noticed the sidewalks were full of folks cheering them on.
-
As it says in the newspaper article the mob was running down the street punching people as they went by, stopping to kick a few as well. They apparently dragged some people out of their cars.
Drug out of a car? No way, Bang. Kicked? No way, Bang. Punched as they ran by? Not much you can do about that without shooting them in the back, and thats not a good idea.
I was brought up to respect my elders, and I always have. Now that I am an Elder I find that I have become, not one to be respected, but prey. It is a strange world we have inherited. I remember growing up and reading stories about the days when wolves roamed the streets of villages at night and it was wise to keep your doors and windows locked. Are we approaching something similar today, where young people roam in packs and feed on the helpless? Just yesterday a young (17 year old) robbed and stabbed to death a blind man in Balt.. What does that say about society?
Rather than the world becoming a safer place I do believe that it has become more dangerous and unprdictable. I mean that from a physical prospective as well as referring to our legal system.
-
I got no problem with shooting the animals in the back. Might put a 2nd to the head if I'm sure there's no cameras around.
-
DGF,
I carry a Blackthorn Walking Stick from Cold Steel when ever I am out and about, even though I don't physically need it yet.
It's a nice handy club that any senior citizen can carry without risk of weapons charges...yet.
It would both be a defense and a warning in the situation about which you are concerned. Beating an aggressive young punk off with your cane seems, by definition, an act of reasonable self defense, as long as you don't live in Great Brittan.
You can find one here and a video about it's effective use here. http://www.coldsteel.com/irishblackthorn.html
Might make a nice non-lethal (maybe) addition to your carry gear.
Might deter those looking to attack you...and if they take it from you, that shows non friendly intent. Use it with your off hand to ward off an attacker with your primary hand on your weapon. When the punk grabs at it and says he is gonna beat you with it, shoot him.
-
DGF,
You are asking a very complex question that has no specific answer. It is an incident by incident situation, and it will change everytime the charactors change. It is also a legal nightmare for anyone giving advice. I will not tell you that it is ok to shoot in that situation, and neither will anyone else that teaches. You will just get refered to the list I gave or a similar one for the jurisdiction the person trains under.
In your description of "just getting punched" I would say that your wording takes away the fear of immediate death, and it also raises the question of if lesser force would do. Ignoring the situation and only looking at how you describe it I would say you have no legal foot to stand on concerning the use of lethal force or even drawing your gun (the reasonable man who will most likely be an anti-gun and anti-carry man in the jury).
You will not get Michael to give you clear cut lines and direction in anything he produces. If you follow The Best Defense you will see MB, MJ and RP, along with all the other experts they bring in, get very cautious and conservative on the carrying and use of weapons. This is because if they say something is ok on their show and you do it, they will end up in court defending themselves. If I tell you it is ok to do something in a given setting on this board and you do it I could very likely end up in the hot seat based on my "professional standing" in giving that advice.
All I will tell you is to know the laws of your State and local jurisdiction, know the rules of the setting you are in, stay alert, avoid trouble whenever possible, work to defuse issues, and if something does happen take a really long deep breath and think before you say anything to anyone about what happened. In a stress situation your preception of time, distance, speed and sound are distorted, and you need your adrenaline to settle down before you say anything to anyone at the scene or away from the scene about what took place. This is an area where I would prefer to error on the side of Masad Ayob, and tell law enforcement the very basics (there it the guy, he came at me with a gun, knife, club or whatever, I shot him out of fear for my life, I will cooperate fully, but I really need to speak with my attorney). Even if the attorney does nothing to change what you say, the time it takes for them to arrive clears you mind and system, and the attorney will also know everything you said about the incident. Nothing worse than your statement five minutes after the event not matching the statement an hour later after you mind clears and perspective returns.
I know this is clear as mud when you are looking for crystal. But as we start everyone of our classes "If you think you are uncertain about carrying a gun now - Wait till we get done with you today."
-
Thank you M58. That is what I was getting at. It is a very complex problem, unlike most cut and dried self defense situations, if there is, in fact, a cut and dried self defense situation. Here at Quantico they built a small village where, with the use of actors, they put military and law enforcement people through shoot or no shoot exercises. They discuss the results of the exercise after the fact. It might be good for CC civilians to have the opportunity to take those same type of classes. The Flash Mob phenomenon might be a good subject for those classes. It would, of course, have to be done with a waiver of liability.
Solus, I do carry a stick, in fact I have several. One I made from a heavy stockman's cane copying the grandmaster cane made by Canemasters. The cane I carry most frequently is a Bubba Sick found on line. It has as a handle the brass Hame from a horse harness. It fits my hand well,it is attractive without being menacing. With the brass handle it balances well with the stick and has enough heft to give you a level of confidence. I have Janich's video on cane self defense which I heartily recommend, and practice regularly to get some exercise .However if the thump doesn't suffice perhaps the bang will. I usually carry both. I have heard good things about Cold Steel. I particularly like their sword cane. Too bad it is illegal.
-
It is not my responsibility to "take a beating" from anyone no matter how well I might be able to absorb the punishment regardless of what age, sex, race or creed or national origin they may be.
Ohio has a "brandishing" law and if the intent of a charging mob wasn't perfectly clear, within the law I could place my hand upon my unexposed weapon and let the mob know they were threatening me and that should they come closer, I'd defend myself.
Further, I'd risk the brandishing charge should the mob continue to close by presenting my weapon and repeating my warning, if there was time. Firing a round safely into the ground might help, but it might hurt in court, portrayed as a reckless act.
It is not in my abilities to read the minds of the members of the mob and discern their true intent. If I believe they are threatening me and lethal force is needed for my self protection, I will use it and do so with moral certainty. I'll face the legal consequences, if any, after I've survived the threat.
If you are not sure of the extent of the violent intentions of a charging mob, you are free to risk life and limb to give them the benefit of the doubt and avoid the legal consequences. I'd discuss it with your wife, though, to be sure she is just as willing to get kicked and beaten and maybe killed for the sake of not misunderstanding the exuberant youths.
In general, I agree with your post. The one area I would quibble with is highlighted. You draw your weapon to defend yourself, not to display your weapon or as a warning. And most of all - There are NO warning shots - that is Hollywood crap. You draw to defend, you shoot the one(s) attacking you to stop the attack. Period.
-
It is not my responsibility to "take a beating" from anyone no matter how well I might be able to absorb the punishment regardless of what age, sex, race or creed or national origin they may be.
Ohio has a "brandishing" law and if the intent of a charging mob wasn't perfectly clear, within the law I could place my hand upon my unexposed weapon and let the mob know they were threatening me and that should they come closer, I'd defend myself.
Further, I'd risk the brandishing charge should the mob continue to close by presenting my weapon and repeating my warning, if there was time. Firing a round safely into the ground might help, but it might hurt in court, portrayed as a reckless act.
It is not in my abilities to read the minds of the members of the mob and discern their true intent. If I believe they are threatening me and lethal force is needed for my self protection, I will use it and do so with moral certainty. I'll face the legal consequences, if any, after I've survived the threat.
If you are not sure of the extent of the violent intentions of a charging mob, you are free to risk life and limb to give them the benefit of the doubt and avoid the legal consequences. I'd discuss it with your wife, though, to be sure she is just as willing to get kicked and beaten and maybe killed for the sake of not misunderstanding the exuberant youths.
Reckless discharge of a firearm - I don't know of a jurisdiction that would let you off on that one!
-
In general, I agree with your post. The one area I would quibble with is highlighted. You draw your weapon to defend yourself, not to display your weapon or as a warning. And most of all - There are NO warning shots - that is Hollywood crap. You draw to defend, you shoot the one(s) attacking you to stop the attack. Period.
Didn't mean to indicate I would fire a shot into the ground, just pointing out less than lethal options that might work and their legal drawbacks.
-
Solus, If it comes to the point you draw a gun "less than lethal" is no longer an option.
Any one who thinks other wise will probably die.
"He who hesitates is lost"
-
Sad topic of discussion. Kids need to learn to respect their peers, the elderly and the handicapped. Somewhere in Wisconsin is a parent who failed to swat their kids on the butt a couple of times...
-
Sad topic of discussion. Kids need to learn to respect their peers, the elderly and the handicapped. Somewhere in Wisconsin is a parent who failed to swat their kids on the butt a couple of times...
;D Amen! ;D
-
Solus, If it comes to the point you draw a gun "less than lethal" is no longer an option.
Any one who thinks other wise will probably die.
"He who hesitates is lost"
I agree. I was making that observation for DGF who seemed concerned with going right to lethality.
If I felt I needed to draw, I'd be hoping I was in time to clear leather, let alone issue any type of warning.
I don't expect a lot of time for most attacks, most likely not enough to give any kind of warning, but in the "charging mob" scenario, you might have 30 or 40 feet to while away your time.
-
All fun making aside. In as realistic a CCW scenario as I can imagine where I actually draw on anyone, I'm already going to be in hand to hand distance with them. Which is why I get a laugh out of all the "OMG! You have to have at least 15 rounds in your gun and a laser!". :-\ Maybe I'm totally wrong.
-
I agree badger. I can't imagine a self defense situation where i would be shooting at more than a hand to hand distance. If they were that far away I would be running and evading, not engaging in a gunfight.
-
All fun making aside. In as realistic a CCW scenario as I can imagine where I actually draw on anyone, I'm already going to be in hand to hand distance with them. Which is why I get a laugh out of all the "OMG! You have to have at least 15 rounds in your gun and a laser!". :-\ Maybe I'm totally wrong.
How about multiple attackers at varying distances. Five guys one nice and close and the other four acting as lookouts until the attacker needs help.
If you also feel that you will never have a need to use cover or move and fire from an unconventional position, like on your back with the target off to your weak side. then no, you only need to be able to handle what you in your flat footed practice at the range using conventional sights.
So why carry the extra weight of all those extra rounds. One attacker, two rounds should do it. One in the chamber one in the mag.
Shoot, if he is always gonna be that close, lose the sights altogether. Just a pain to practice with and likely to snag.
-
Your absolutely right. ANYTHING can happen. And no telling what crazy position you may be shooting from. I'm just playing the odds. I carry an LCP (with a laser I'm probably going to remove), or on RARE occasion that I suspect it may be needed, a G30.
1. I believe (and may be wrong!) any shooting over 15 feet is going to land you in jail for sure unless a crowd of a hundred see's the other guy draw on you first. And yeah, unless they see he has a gun drawn, not a knife or anything else, I still believe your going to jail.
2. I believe (and may be wrong!) Crowds of people in this country don't generally all spontaneously turn violent toward one person in their midst all that often. :-\ (if you EVER see this... Move to a better neighborhood for F sakes!)
3. I believe (and may be wrong!) I'm not going to need to shoot through a car windshield or body armor in "self defense" tomorrow with my ccw gun.
4. I believe (and may be wrong!) It's not likely a gang of even the dumbest teenagers is going to watch 3 or 4 of their buddies get shot and not run like hell when your still holding the gun that did it in your hand. They may be "gangsta's", but aren't totally suicidal, or, trained by KGB to kill you or be killed themselves. ::)
5. I believe (and know I'm right!) Most people carry their ccw gun with paranoid visions of zombies attacking, a nuclear bomb going off and the whole world goes completely mad and turns against them personally, watch to many movies with absolutely ridiculous shooting scenarios in them, take the typical stupid american attitude of "Bigger is always better", and arm themselves accordingly (it's a "compensation" thing. Little blue pills and all that.)
Last, but not least. Situational awareness, and common sense lend themselves to my not having to rely solely on firepower to get me out of a bad situation. BUT, one of the very few good things remaining about this country... If you believe there's a need to carry a full auto 9mm with tracers, lasers, flashlights, a scope and (5) 32rnd magazines for ccw... You can! ;D
I'm just playing the odds as I see them. (the LCP is just about perfect imo) :)
-
with multiple attackers, you move to "stack" them , put them in front or behind each other. You must move fast.
You may need to retreat quickly. A deadly threat is a matter not taken lightly, it comes in many forms.
-
And, with multiple attackers, you might want to keep the boarding house rule in mind: Nobody gets seconds until everyone has gotten a first serving. Since I usually don't carry a spare magazine, if the need arises I will have to stretch those nine rounds as far as I can.
-
" 2. I believe (and may be wrong!) Crowds of people in this country don't generally all spontaneously turn violent toward one person in their midst all that often. (if you EVER see this... Move to a better neighborhood for f sakes. "
Badger, I believe this was true up until recently. With the advent of these flash mobs it doesn't seem to matter what neighborhood you are in. I looks like crowds of people ARE turning spontaneously violent.
-
Flash mobs are also robbing stores in the U.S. and Canada. They use sights like Facebook or Twitter to organize their attacks. A mob can pop up anywhere there's a bunch of black teenagers. They're the only ones I've heard of being in these mobs.
-
And, with multiple attackers, you might want to keep the boarding house rule in mind: Nobody gets seconds until everyone has gotten a first serving. Since I usually don't carry a spare magazine, if the need arises I will have to stretch those nine rounds as far as I can.
Good thinking. I've always been a believer in two or even three helpings per customer. But with as DGF mentions, an increased possibility of multiple attackers... Soup line rules make good sense! ;)
Or, as another advantage of most .380's, you can carry half a dozen extra magazines in your left pocket. ;D I really wish the LCP had a last round slide stop to make reloads quicker. Rugers been to busy with other innovative thinking though. :(
I need to look into the whole "flash mob" thing more.
-
It is becoming an epidemic.
<a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20110809/D9P0I3AG0.html">Flashmob</a>
-
I seldom listen to Michael Banes radio blog, but today I listened to his blog on Mob Violence. Someone here recommended it to me. He hits the nail on the head. It is worth listening to his take on what possible action to apply. He said that they are planning to have a this subject on TBD as well.