Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive :: View topic - Yet another one more reason>

Scott Hughes wrote:

The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine :!:

bensdad wrote:

Every man who walked past this event needs to proceed directly to his woodshed and whip his own ass.

aypstony wrote:

Yikes, seven perps. If the father had been a permit holder and fired shots, it would be hard for him prove he was a reluctant participant in this incident.

Quote:

609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE.
Subdivision 1. When authorized. Except [by a criminal against a cop], reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other's consent when the following circumstances exist or the actor reasonably believes them to exist:
***
(3) when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person; or ... .

kimberman wrote:

. A nearby permit holder, reasonably perceiving that the victim was facing an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm (as 7 or 8 young thugs kicked the shit out of him) would have been authorized to use protective force, including deadly force.

gaygoalie wrote:

If he was a permit holder and they denied him his right to protect himself, could he sue the park? They knew there was a risk (they have security guards) but they weren't able to help him..

Drizzle wrote:

Thanks for the replies, sorry for the dupe thread. Pocket carry at VF would be ideal (just make sure it doesn't fall out when you're on the Looping Starship).

As to what I'd have done, I'd like to say I'd have drawn down and tried to put a stop to it, it seems to meet the 4 reasons for drawing a weapon as outlined in Joel's book and class. But. Saying what you'd do is different than being there. A gang of 8+ people on one. They might turn on you, and if you draw, you'd better be prepared to shoot.

If I was there alone, or with a group that can get away on their own, maybe. With the family, if it included kids, maybe not. Be a witness, maybe trip someone, maybe shout "Cops", but I remember something I read somewhere else: If it's worth ten thousand dollars to you, and you have no other alternative, shoot. If not, don't. Think of the cost to you and yours of you do draw and have to shoot. Is it worth it to you to protect someone else at the financial cost if you fire a shot? Even if you don't, brandishing is still a charge, though it might not be leveled in this case.

I know we all think of scenarios, but I just don't know. Even intervening physically w/o a firearm, if you're armed, could be risky.

thanks

montana_redneck wrote:

2. If you were a bystander and witnessed this, what would you do? Carrying or Not.

Andrew Rothman wrote:

Scott Hughes wrote:

The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine :!:

The whole thing is yet another reason for <s>Castle Doctrine</s> <u>Stand Your Ground</u> legislation. :!:

Scott Hughes wrote:

Andrew Rothman wrote:

Scott Hughes wrote:

The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine :!:

The whole thing is yet another reason for <s>Castle Doctrine</s> <u>Stand Your Ground</u> legislation. :!:

You are correct. Thanks Andrew.

Sipowicz wrote:

If I was seeing someone get the crap kicked out of them, I don't think I could NOT try to help that person.

I think Toby Keith says it best - "I ain't as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was."

Author:	Andrew Rothman [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:55 pm ]
Post subject:
Scott Hughes wrote: The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine The whole thing is yet another reason for <s>Castle Doctrine</s> <u>Stand Your Ground</u> legislation.

Author:	bensdad [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:
Hoodlum grabs 12yr. old's ass? Dad has a reaction? Hoodlum calls in backup? Dad shoots a couple? Scott County? I'd feel pretty comfortable with a jury trial. I'd probably have to beg my father for $$$. I know I'd have to get another mortgage. Oh well. Every man who walked past this event needs to proceed directly to his woodshed and whip his own ass.

Author:	kecker [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:
bensdad wrote: Every man who walked past this event needs to proceed directly to his woodshed and whip his own ass. My thoughts too. It sounds like the wife and other female relatives tried to intervene and save the guy. It happened just inside the gate, at closing time. You know there had to be at least a couple strapping men around that could have helped the guy out. Or at least torn a couple of the a-holes off his back.

Author:	kimberman [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:46 pm ]
Post subject:
aypstony wrote: Yikes, seven perps. If the father had been a permit holder and fired shots, it would be hard for him prove he was a reluctant participant in this incident. Many on this board don't understand that "reluctant participant" is not the legal test, it's writer's shorthand (which even I've been known to use). So you tend to over emphasize that element. What you can't be is an UNLAWFUL aggressor. Other states with more developed self-defense statutes make this clear [by using terms such as "did not provoke" the fight]. So does the case law. Asserting your minor daughter's right to free from unwelcome physical contact is perfectly OK. Ordering them to stay away from your family is OK. Those are mere words. But, the father could have physically pushed her assailant away. Lawful use of force is not legal "provocation." We tend to forget that "non-deadly reasonable force" can be used too. Minn. Stat. 606.06 says this: Quote: 609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE. Subdivision 1. When authorized. Except [by a criminal against a cop], reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other's consent when the following circumstances exist or the actor reasonably believes them to exist: *** (3) when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person; or ... . The young thugs chose to respond with unlawful force. Then THEY escalated to deadly force (the multiple assailant attack on the man down). After the multiple-assailant attack began, the father absolutely could have defended himself if he had anything with which to do so (such as a gun). A nearby permit holder, reasonably perceiving that the victim was facing an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm (as 7 or 8 young thugs kicked the shit out of him) would have been authorized to use protective force, including deadly force. According to the criminal charges, the victim suffered skull fractures and possible bleeding on the brain which ARE injuries capable of causing death or GBH.

Author:	gaygoalie [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:
kimberman wrote: . A nearby permit holder, reasonably perceiving that the victim was facing an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm (as 7 or 8 young thugs kicked the shit out of him) would have been authorized to use protective force, including deadly force. But valleyfair is posted.. and they have their own security force.. If he was a permit holder and they denied him his right to protect himself, could he sue the park? They knew there was a risk (they have security guards) but they weren't able to help him..

Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/

Yet another one more reason> http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=9403	Page 3 of 5

Author:	kimberman [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:19 pm ]
Post subject:
gaygoalie wrote: If he was a permit holder and they denied him his right to protect himself, could he sue the park? They knew there was a risk (they have security guards) but they weren't able to help him.. He should. Their guards were absent. They failed to provide the protection they UNDERTOOK to provide by affirmatively acting to force him to rely on their implied promise. They'll pay $$$ to settle the case. They don't want to set a precedent.

Author:	Traveler [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:41 pm ]
Post subject:
Valley Fair most likely will be sued. They are the only ones with deep pockets in the entire group. It would be an interesting case IF the victim were a permit holder and IF he had left his weapon in the parking lot or home due to the signage. It might be moot as a legal point, but a jury pondering damages might be interested.

Author:	montana_redneck [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 7:55 pm ]
Post subject:	What would you do?
I've been thinking about this and have a couple of scenarios... 1. If this happened to you what would you do? Carrying or Not Carrying. My answer, but I want to hear yours too: I have 3 daughters and if this happened to me, I would have definitely verbally confronted the 2, whether I was carrying or not. When the others showed up... Carrying: I would have tried to talk to them, but if it was obvious that a beating was coming. Draw with threat and hope that it ended there. If it didn't, then I think that 8 on 1 is enough for me to be in danger. Not Carrying: I would have to try and protect my family any way I could. 2. If you were a bystander and witnessed this, what would you do? Carrying or Not. This is a tough one for me... I would like to think that I would help the guy BUT Not Carrying: My chances are pretty slim that I'm going to make a difference. It is very likely that I end up with the same injuries he has. I would try to get others to go in with me to help, but I don't know how that would work. Carrying: I'm still not sure what I would do here. If myself or my family is not in danger I'm not sure I would be drawing

Author:	Drizzle [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:36 pm ]
Post subject:
Thanks for the replies, sorry for the dupe thread. Pocket carry at VF would be ideal (just make sure it doesn't fall out when you're on the Looping Starship). As to what I'd have done, I'd like to say I'd have drawn down and tried to put a stop to it, it seems to meet the 4 reasons for drawing a weapon as outlined in Joel's book and class. But. Saying what you'd do is different than being there. A gang of 8+ people on one. They might turn on you, and if you draw, you'd better be prepared to shoot. If I was there alone, or with a group that can get away on their own, maybe. With the family, if it included kids, maybe not. Be a witness, maybe trip someone, maybe shout "Cops", but I remember something I read somewhere else: If it's worth ten thousand dollars to you, and you have no other alternative, shoot. If not, don't. Think of the cost to you and yours of you do draw and have to shoot. Is it worth it to you to protect someone else at the financial cost if you fire a shot? Even if you don't, brandishing is still a charge, though it might not be leveled in this case. I know we all think of scenarios, but I just don't know. Even intervening physically w/o a firearm, if you're armed, could be risky. thanks

Author:	Moby Clarke [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Drizzle wrote: Thanks for the replies, sorry for the dupe thread. Pocket carry at VF would be ideal (just make sure it doesn't fall out when you're on the Looping Starship). As to what I'd have done, I'd like to say I'd have drawn down and tried to put a stop to it, it seems to meet the 4 reasons for drawing a weapon as outlined in Joel's book and class. But. Saying what you'd do is different than being there. A gang of 8+ people on one. They might turn on you, and if you draw, you'd better be prepared to shoot. If I was there alone, or with a group that can get away on their own, maybe. With the family, if it included kids, maybe not. Be a witness, maybe trip someone, maybe shout "Cops", but I remember something I read somewhere else: If it's worth ten thousand dollars to you, and you have no other alternative, shoot. If not, don't. Think of the cost to you and yours of you do draw and have to shoot. Is it worth it to you to protect someone else at the financial cost if you fire a shot? Even if you don't, brandishing is still a charge, though it might not be leveled in this case. I know we all think of scenarios, but I just don't know. Even intervening physically w/o a firearm, if you're armed, could be risky. thanks I agree, except there is no Brandishing law in MN.

Author:	Sipowicz [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: What would you do?
montana_redneck wrote: 2. If you were a bystander and witnessed this, what would you do? Carrying or Not. If I was seeing someone get the crap kicked out of them, I don't think I could NOT try to help that person. I think Toby Keith says it best - "I ain't as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was."

Author:	Scott Hughes [ Tue Jul 15, 2008 10:28 pm ]
Post subject:
Andrew Rothman wrote: Scott Hughes wrote: The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine The whole thing is yet another reason for <s>Castle Doctrine</s> <u>Stand Your Ground</u> legislation. You are correct. Thanks Andrew.

Author:	TeamSpringFieldXD [ Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:00 am ]
Post subject:
Scott Hughes wrote: Andrew Rothman wrote: Scott Hughes wrote: The whole thing is yet another reason for Castle Doctrine The whole thing is yet another reason for <s>Castle Doctrine</s> <u>Stand Your Ground</u> legislation. You are correct. Thanks Andrew. Your dam right! Although personally i would've had a hard time not drawing my firearm being beaten by 8 men, no wait, cowards. Especially ones who sexually assault my daughter. These guys are scum, if you see there pics you'll know exactly what im talking about. Its a good thing these scumbags didn't have a gun because i have a feeling this guy would be much worse off. Where was the security? Oh yea the same place cops are when crimes are being committed, just minutes away. This guy is probably going to win a monster lawsuit from ValleyFair (not that it makes it worth it) but he obviously can't sue these scumbags because he won't get a penny from them, and if i had to guess them and there families are living off uncle sam anyways.

Author:	kimberman [ Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: What would you do?
Sipowicz wrote: If I was seeing someone get the crap kicked out of them, I don't think I could NOT try to help that person. I think Toby Keith says it best - "I ain't as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was." Ditto.

Page 3 of 5	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	jac714 [ Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:25 am ]
Post subject:
This is one of my nightmare scenarios, like many others I could not stand by and watch 8 people beat some guy to death, but on the other hand I am reluctant to put my self in the legal situation that would develop from armed intervention. I am thinking that in this particular case you might shout at the thugs to stop and if they responded by moving towards you in a threatening manner I would imagine it would not be difficult to make the point that you feared Death or GBH from an assault. The people moving towards you just abandoned their physical assault on another, there are a number of them, they have demonstrated their willingness to use violence to further their goals so would shooting at that point be reasonable? I would think so.