Giving yourself PERMISSION to use deadly force

[caseyc]

I was robbed at gunpoint when i was 17 for a whole $16! That being said i know if i had to shoot i would to defend myself, and with the other scenario about watching someone getting robbed or being harmed i dont think i could just sit there and watch another person get shot and being seriously injured or killed. I couldnt live with myself if i knew i could have prevented that person from being killed

 

[norman428]

I honestly think that if i felt my life was in danger, i would have zero trouble shooting someone. I'm not going to loose my life just because I'm afraid to take someone else's. If they were dumb enough to try to hurt/kill me, they have it coming.

 

[Johnny C]

So, I f I shoot someone that was attacking someone else, how was I in fear for my life in doing so?

I know it might be the right thing to do, given the situation, but wont you get strung up for doing it?

 

[JetGirl]

wont you get strung up for doing it?

No, you can act in defense of another according to our Castle Doctrine.

 

[thompal]

Col Dave Grossman wrote a book called "On Killing" on precisely that subject. You might want to check it out.

Best,

Joe

I had forgotten about that book, but it is right on point. He says that many members of the military can't bring themselves to actually kill another human, even in the heat of battle.

 

[silentvoice71]

LCPR in post 10 is right if you carry a gun be ready to use it....what kind of sissy crap is well im a peaceful person but i carry a gun.........well replace said gun with tampon and hand me your firearm because your not in the right state of mind to be carrying........Some of the posts in here are sad.....very sad and honestly Ive lost respect for certain people in here.


P.S. When i started to carry i made a personal oath to up hold. That i will protect my self my family and anyone else in bodly harm. I will abide my the rules/laws of my state and i will kill anyone who trys to harm my self family and imediate close range strangers. Now with that said i dont go looking for fights by all means i like things quiet but that doesnt mean that i wont help someone when they need it. I help old ladies with groceries i hold doors open for people and i make it a job to shovel snow or mow grass for my elderly neighbors........As long as i remain valiant , true and honest to the people around me and god......I am a good man.

 

[Josh Ward]

I can NOT believe some of the posts I see in this forum. I carry concealed, I carry open, But I am not sure if I could actually kill someone. Isn't that sort of an oxymoron? If you carry a weapon for personal protection or have one for home defense you had very well be ready to kill a BG. If you have to think about it, it most likely will be too late. If you don' know without a doubt get rid of that personal or home defense item. When faced with a life and death crisis when milliseconds count indecision will simply get you killed. Carrying is a gigantic responsibility and should never be taken lightly.

Reps....BEFORE you take on the responsibility and strap on a gun, you'd better take a hard look at your attitudes, moral obligations, and responsibilty associated with carrying. You'd better damn well decide AHEAD OF TIME wether you'll shoot another human being or not, and under what situations. Draw the line in the sand now so to speak.

 

[TRWXXA]

I have always looked at it as it is not my choice, it is his,

+1

A bad guy's CHOICE to threaten my life. It is my OBLIGATION to defend myself.

And I will not fret over the loss of a criminal. I know there is always another one ready to take his place.

 

[thompal]

I will abide my the rules/laws of my state and i will kill anyone who trys to harm my self family and imediate close range strangers.

I think you need to correct this. You will SHOOT anyone who tries to harm you or your family. You will shoot him until he stops being a threat. If he dies, as a result of his actions, then the fault lays with him. However, it is NOT your intent to kill him. Your goal is simply to defend yourself and make him stop being a threat.

There is a huge difference.

 

[Johnny C]

HMMMM
Lets see, Since I stated that I dont know for sure if I can shoot someone till it actually happens, I am a sissy, need a tampon and have lost respect from certain folks on this site.

There are all kinds of folks in the world with different mentalities, some more willing to hurt others than others. Personally, I have never been in a real fight in my 45 years of life, I have always been able to defuse the situation. So I am at the far end of the spectrum I am sure.

But hey, I am sure that there are lots of of armchair tough guys on this site, spouting tough talk. I am just trying to be honest, thats hard to find online these days.

But hey, If that makes me a tampon wearing disrespected sissy, than so be it. I dont need respect from people that are that judgmental of others without really knowing them anyways.

Johnny C

 

[groovatron]

I respect you questioning. At least you are thinking about the reality of a potential situation. There are many cowboys out there that fantasize all day about lettin' the BG have it. It's pretty obvious from their post content. Who gives a f**k what the giant douches say. It just makes them feel bigger and badder. The tougher they feel, the more they can continue on the path of ignoring their own insecurities.......

I carry a gun because they exist......it's as simple as that. We can speculate all day about possible scenarios where we will have to make decisions to shoot or not......although this can be educational and entertaining, it really plays a small role when the actual situation rears it's ugly head. Most self-defense "survivors" will talk about how instinct and training took over.

 

[finity]

So, I f I shoot someone that was attacking someone else, how was I in fear for my life in doing so?

I know it might be the right thing to do, given the situation, but wont you get strung up for doing it?

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

As you can see from the IC above protecting someone else is completely legal.

 

[ChalupaCabras]

From what I'm reading here, it seems that at the source of the problem is good old fashioned humanism.

Your going to need to rid yourselves of that.

 

[Arm America]

Somewhat of a no brainer for me.

I will use whatever means available to suspend or prevent
harm to my family or myself.

Be it a table leg, a ball bat or yes, even a firearm.

The State recognizes that we may find ourselves in harms way
and provides us with laws to legally do so.

I have no desire to bring harm or inflict pain on someone under "normal conditions"....

If someone chooses to change the "conditions",
they will suffer the consequences.

They made that choice.

 

[bigmedicine]

HMMMM
Lets see, Since I stated that I dont know for sure if I can shoot someone till it actually happens, I am a sissy, need a tampon and have lost respect from certain folks on this site.

For what it is worth, I do not think any of those things about you at all. You are a decent person that is wise to explore the consequences of actions before they are taken. To me, that makes you a decent person.

The only thing I can share for me is my own thought process that I initiated years ago. I struggled for a short time until I developed the opinion that the instant a "person" begins to act in a way that threatens me or another person, they have basically forfeited their humanity. Once I made that mental decision, I have had no issues with what I would do if put in a chance to defend myself. It isn't pretty, it isn't something I would really want to ever brag about, but it is what I have decided I needed to do in order to go forward. God put me here on this earth to protect myself, my wife, and our children. For me, the "risk" of not doing so outweighs any worries I may have about actually doing something. That thought process worked for me in the service and
works for me now. I don't proclaim it to be the perfect solution, but it is what I have to do.

Good luck with your continued reflection on this. Again, you won't get any grief from some of us when you show that you care about the type of person you are and the perils of being a citizen in today's world.

 

[jonkertb]

well, I've played the internal mind games often too......So far being raised in Detroit has given me enough sense to stay out of places that would put me in situations where I have to make "the decision"
I may error on the side of caution but one thing that needs reminding especially with the quoted Indiana Code
.....there has to be threat of bodily harm present.....it doesn't seem that one coming up on a robbery will have a case if someone is simply verbally intimidating someone at an ATM for their $$ with no weapon present and no strong arming......can I shoot his butt?? NO
If he is holding a gun to someone at an ATM and the victim is in fear for their life? ......snick boom deadly force is not for the protection of personal property unless one is in fear for their life
but ...no need to respond to my reply cause I ain't no lawyer and I did order a set of electronic ear muffs last night :>)
tom

 

[DRob]

Well Johnny C,

HMMMM
Lets see, Since I stated that I dont know for sure if I can shoot someone till it actually happens, I am a sissy, need a tampon and have lost respect from certain folks on this site.

There are all kinds of folks in the world with different mentalities, some more willing to hurt others than others. Personally, I have never been in a real fight in my 45 years of life, I have always been able to defuse the situation. So I am at the far end of the spectrum I am sure.

But hey, I am sure that there are lots of of armchair tough guys on this site, spouting tough talk. I am just trying to be honest, thats hard to find online these days.

But hey, If that makes me a tampon wearing disrespected sissy, than so be it. I dont need respect from people that are that judgmental of others without really knowing them anyways.

Johnny C

Well said. Seems to me you have a better grip on reality than some others.

 

[88E30M50]

Given perfect knowledge of a situation where someone is being attacked and I have the ability to stop that attack, I am confident that I could shoot. The big question though, is how much knowledge do you need about a situation before joining action using deadly force. The more I know a person, the more I probably know about the situation at hand. Let's say I am pumping gas at a station and hear a gunshot coming from inside the store, then see two men running out. The second one is about 15 feet behind the first and clearly carrying a gun. Do I take him under fire? At this point, I don't know if two guys just robbed the place, or if one guy just robbed the place and is being pursued by a fellow CC'r. If the first man is my son, who had gone in for a soda, you bet I'm going to fire on the second guy, but if they are both strangers, you had better be pretty careful before shooting.

Many of the arguments in this thread assume perfect knowledge of the situation. But, I think it's tough to say what I'd do in any situation until I know what that situation is.

 

[finity]

well, I've played the internal mind games often too......So far being raised in Detroit has given me enough sense to stay out of places that would put me in situations where I have to make "the decision"
I may error on the side of caution but one thing that needs reminding especially with the quoted Indiana Code
.....there has to be threat of bodily harm present.....it doesn't seem that one coming up on a robbery will have a case if someone is simply verbally intimidating someone at an ATM for their $$ with no weapon present and no strong arming......can I shoot his butt?? NO
If he is holding a gun to someone at an ATM and the victim is in fear for their life? ......snick boom deadly force is not for the protection of personal property unless one is in fear for their life
but ...no need to respond to my reply cause I ain't no lawyer and I did order a set of electronic ear muffs last night :>)
tom

Yeah, Yeah, I know you said not to reply...you got shiny new ear muffs...blah, blah. This isn't for you if you don't want to listen but for anybody else who wants to know what the law really says...

Bodily injury is not the only justification to use deadly force. You missed the part of the code that pertains to a "forcible felony".

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony.

A "forcible felony" is defined as:

IC 35-41-1-11
"Forcible felony" defined
Sec. 11. "Forcible felony" means a felony that involves the use or threat of force against a human being, or in which there is imminent danger of bodily injury to a human being.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.12.

Robbery is a felony. It is defined in the section of the IC dealing with crimes against a person.

IC 35-42-5-1
Robbery
Sec. 1. A person who knowingly or intentionally takes property from another person or from the presence of another person:
(1) by using or threatening the use of force on any person; or
(2) by putting any person in fear;
commits robbery, a Class C felony. However, the offense is a Class B felony if it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon or results in bodily injury to any person other than a defendant, and a Class A felony if it results in serious bodily injury to any person other than a defendant.
As added by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.39. Amended by Acts 1982, P.L.204, SEC.34; P.L.186-1984, SEC.1.

If in your scenario the person was just asking for money & would take a simple no for an answer, then it is not a forcible felony. If however, the harassment is such that there is an implication of using force to get the money then that is a forcible felony &, according to the code, deadly force would be justified.

BTW, "intimidation" is defined by law & is a felony if the threat also falls into the "forcible felony" definition.

Would you need to shoot? Maybe not but it depends heavily on the situation. But YOU HAVE THE OPTION if necessary & are protected by law as long as you can articulate why you were afraid.

If YOU decide not to use deadly force for your own personal reasons, that's fine but don't make blanket statements about the illegality of something that isn't supported by the law.

 

[jonkertb]

well, ok, I'll not share my blanket...blanket statements are for twin beds only :>) ...and Im not sharing blankets with anyone on here LOL

and yes my new shooting muffs came today LOL

now....I'll tell you what my law background is if you'll do the same....zero....I'm not taking any chances with how a slick lawyer and jury might interpret the law either.......

my point I guess was not written well as happens on forums...the point being...in all the code citations above the wording refers to:
quotes:
--reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force
--believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury
--involves the use or threat of force against a human being, or in which there is imminent danger of bodily injury to a human being.
(1) by using or threatening the use of force on any person; or
(2) by putting any person in fear;

we can senario all day long but the word BELIEVES can put us in trouble I believe because it has to be a reasonable belief doesn't it? esp when we are observing two strangers in the senario...who might be husband and wife....brother sister ?

not practicing law no mo no mo :>)
not convinced on the audio of these new muffs either
any lawyers on here?...that will admit it :>)