Who would you use deadly force to protect?


PDA






Mandirigma
August 17, 2006, 07:29 AM
Knowing that doing so won't protect yourself from civil consequences.

If you enjoyed reading about "Who would you use deadly force to protect?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
usp9
August 17, 2006, 07:33 AM
Anyone under DEADLY threat. That simple.

geekWithA.45
August 17, 2006, 07:41 AM
The only real variable in that equation is whether I believed I had full situational awareness.

You're walking through a parking lot, and actor A is pointing a gun at actor B.

Who's the bad guy and why?

Mandirigma
August 17, 2006, 07:49 AM
Figure full Situational Awareness, and a justifiable shooting. Not a trick question/poll. Just wondering what the general consensus would be.

The only real variable in that equation is whether I believed I had full situational awareness.

You're walking through a parking lot, and actor A is pointing a gun at actor B.

Who's the bad guy and why?

not to nitpick, but with total awareness, cameras and crew would be noticeable (Though they could have been rehearsing I know :) ). I didn't specify, and I probably should have. Sorry.

strambo
August 17, 2006, 08:17 AM
I would protect anyone in certain circumstances and not in others. The situation is more important than the "who".

jrfoxx
August 17, 2006, 08:23 AM
Given that you said full situational awareness, I voted for "All", however I do not include pets/animals in that (just my personal feeling there).

geekWithA.45
August 17, 2006, 08:48 AM
Yeah, the legal calculus on defending pets/animals/livestock is probably very dicey, and I don't have a lot of detail in that area.

I suspect some states have cattle rustling/livestock laws, whereas others (like NJ) who value criminals above honest folk would insist that you must allow scumbag A to strangle your cat.

Erebus
August 17, 2006, 09:03 AM
Choose all but I would never use deadly force to protect an animal from a human being. Animal on animal maybe, basically only if I was 100% sure there was no danger to any people if I did.

stevelyn
August 17, 2006, 09:40 AM
Outside of my job, I would only protect my own hide and family. Friends can take care of themselves.
Strangers are on their own as there is no way of telling who the bad guy is.

Lennyjoe
August 17, 2006, 09:46 AM
Myself and my family are #1 priority.

All others depends on the situation. If I'm at the Circle K getting a drink and someone starts blasting then I'll do what I have to. If the guy just points a gun at the attendant and asks for money then I'm finding a safe spot to ride it out.

progunner1957
August 17, 2006, 09:48 AM
Outside of my job, I would only protect my own hide and family. Friends can take care of themselves.
Strangers are on their own as there is no way of telling who the bad guy is.
I would have to reluctantly agree. Not that I want to agree, but our so-called legal system has made it that way.
You're walking through a parking lot, and actor A is pointing a gun at actor B.

Who's the bad guy and why?
When you walk up on a situation in progress, you have no idea what's going on. "Actor A" could be an undercover cop and "Actor B" could be a murderer or crack dealer being arrested for all you know.

If that is the case and you jump in, you have just bought yourself a world of hurt - probably felony charges of obstruction of justice, pointing a firearm at a police officer, criminal confinement and whatever else the prosecutor's office can come up with.

If that is the case, you can kiss your gun collection - and probably your home, family and freedom - goodbye.

Take care of you and yours, and let others do the same or suffer the consequences of being unprepared, unarmed sheeple. The sheeple say, "The police will protect me, there's no need to own a gun." Since they believe that, let them live by it.

That may sound harsh, but I have some bad news, folks: Reality is harsh.

Just my thoughts on the subject - YMMV.

TallPine
August 17, 2006, 09:50 AM
I like my animals better than most people ... :uhoh:

hankdatank1362
August 17, 2006, 09:59 AM
It's a real shame the law says I can't kill to protect my dog. I'm pretty damn sure my dog would kill or die trying to protect me.

orangelo
August 17, 2006, 10:11 AM
"Officer, look what he did to my <cat,dog,wife,son,pickup truck,etc...>. I thought I was next, I was in fear for my life."

enfield
August 17, 2006, 10:17 AM
Just me and my family. I'm not a cop and don't want to be.

Deanimator
August 17, 2006, 10:47 AM
Ohio law allows you to defend others if you, similarly situated would be entitled to defend yourself.

I don't go running around looking for crimes to thwart, but anybody who even having called the police, would stand around and watch somebody beat and rape a woman until the cops come, without intervening if he has the means, shouldn't lie to himself and others by calling himself a man.

Tim Burke
August 17, 2006, 11:00 AM
The only real variable in that equation is whether I believed I had full situational awareness.Precisely. You never have full situational awareness, but, in general, the closer you are to the scenario, the better your data.
My understanding is that some states differentiate between using deadly force to protect yourself, which is judged by a reasonable man standard, and deadly force to protect someone else, which is judged by the actual circumstances. Thus, if someone threatens you with an airsoft gun at dusk, and you, thinking the gun is real, shoot them, you acted reasonably. You should be absolved. If they threaten someone else with an airsoft gun at dusk, and you, thinking the gun is real, shoot them, you still acted reasonably. However, since under the actual circumstances there was no lethal threat, you may still be found to be at fault.
Sorry, strangers, you may be on your own.

Lupinus
August 17, 2006, 11:29 AM
anyone I saw in trouble and under a deadly threat.

Doesn't matter if I know them or not but the hell if I am just going to walk by some dirt bag beating or raping a woman and do nothing but call the cops when I have a gun and can stop it then and there. Hell even if I didn't have a gun I'd still use something whether its a knife a rock or my bare hands.

Being armed doesn't make us all police officers, but we are all still human beings and it is the right thing to do when you see someone being seriously injured or killed to do all you can to help them.

HankB
August 17, 2006, 11:36 AM
I'm not a cop wannabe, so I'm only fully prepared to use deadly force to protect myself and my family - because in a threatening situation, only with myself and my family can I be 100% certain who the good guys are.

Friends . . . generally yes. I learned a long time ago to choose friends carefully, so I'm pretty sure I could tell who the good guy is.

Pets . . . don't have one right now, so it doesn't apply. Generally speaking, I'm not going to protect someone else's pet with deadly force.

Strangers . . . generally no. I'm not going to stand idly by if some machete-crazed lunatic is hacking away at little kids standing by a school bus stop, but except for extreme situations, I'm not going to involve myself in altercations between strangers.

springmom
August 17, 2006, 11:46 AM
...nor do I play him on TV.

However, if I am in a store with a holdup, or a bank with a holdup, I'll do what I can to protect myself and those around me. That does not necessarily equate to challenging the guy with the gun. It does mean that if I can find a good place to hunker down, and there are strangers with me, I will protect them as myself.

So yes, I'd use deadly force to protect strangers in the context in which this is legal in Texas. No, I will not go along pretending I have police powers and am the sheepdog of the neighborhood and yadda yadda yadda.

Common sense is a good thing.

Springmom

strambo
August 17, 2006, 12:02 PM
I think in 90+% of the real, violent criminal assaults, it will be clear. If you see a man/men attacking a woman, I cannot believe the average person couldn't tell the difference between an undercover cop arresting her and a sociopath trying to beat and rape her. Body language, verbals and the manner of attack will be clear.

If you see two men fighting...well if you are not sure, then get cover and call the police. I'm a lot less likely to jump into situations grown men get into. They usually are all at fault. It's not like you have to decide in advance you will never help a third party no matter what. If you witness something and it is clear (not the wishy washy, internet "what-iffing"), then act. If you witness something and in the situation, you aren't sure (your gut, instincts are undecided) then just call the cops and be a good witness. If something you see later makes it clear one way or the other, then act based on the new info.

The main thing is not to think of yourself as a hero looking to save the day. If you do, it will prep your subconscious to be biased in interpreting a situation in a manner that will allow you to be the hero. A guy not wanting any trouble, or to be a hero, who witnesses something will likely not misinterpret IMHO. Also the undercover what if's much less likely than it just being an assault.

High Planes Drifter
August 17, 2006, 12:13 PM
I would have voted all including stranger, but I interpreted "all" as meaning I would use deadly force to protect animals/pets also. Therefore I voted myself, family and friends; tho I would use deadly force to protect a stranger if need be. I would not use deadly force on another human to protect an animal. I really dont think one could expect to get away with that here in my neck of the woods.

Lupinus
August 17, 2006, 12:13 PM
In SC as I understand the defense of others law is that if you put yourself in their place and deadly force would be authorized you in turn can use deadly force to protect them. So if you saw someone being mugged/rapped/whatever and s/he would legaly be able to use deadly force but lacks the means you in turn can use deadly force to protect them.

I don't know if I'd say I'd use deadly force everytime I saw someone who would legally be in their rights to use it, but I can say that if circumstances were right then absoloutly.

M2 Carbine
August 17, 2006, 12:17 PM
The BIG IF is if (somehow) I am fully aware of exactly what is taking place.

IF I knew that I was actually seeing a aggravated kidnapping, rape, deadly assault, etc, taking place I would shoot in a second.

I can't stand a coward and if I didn't do what I could to stop such as a rape, child abduction or someone shooting people in a Wal Mart parking, I couldn't look at myself in the mirror in the morning.

As far as civil lawsuits, etc?
I refuse to allow the possibility of that stuff to interfere with the way I live or my doing what is right.

Animals?
My pets are my family, my only close family. I will not allow them to be, purposely, harmed.

Other pets?
True example.
In the DFW area there is sub human filth that has poured gas on dogs and set them on fire, gouged their eyes out and did other inhuman things.
Given the oppurnity I would use DEADLY force against these people.

Technosavant
August 17, 2006, 12:38 PM
Assuming best case scenario, I voted "all."

There was that incident a few month back where a murderous ex-husband was trying to stab his wife to death behind the deli counter at a Wal-Mart. A CCW holder intervened and saved the woman's life by shooting the assailant.

That sort of thing is pretty cut-and-dried. I don't pretend to be a policeman and I have no desire to jump into a situation where the actors are not clearly defined. I would also have a difficult time living with myself if I allowed an innocent person to be killed if I knew I could take action, had the knowledge I needed to take action, but withheld from taking action.

As the saying goes, all that is needed for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

I think there is going to be a wide variety of answers because of the wide variety of situations. For every obvious "evil person attacking an innocent with intent to murder" there will be a "two guys scuffling in the parking lot."

Kahr T9
August 17, 2006, 12:57 PM
I would protect my family and me, that's it. Everyone else has the same opportunity to attend training classes and get issued a CHP. If they chose not to, that's at their peril. I don't think they should expect me to "save them" and go through all of the legal aspects of the shooting if they chose not to equip themselves to defend against an aggressor. Just my 1/50th of a dollar.


Other pets?
True example.
In the DFW area there is sub human filth that has poured gas on dogs and set them on fire, gouged their eyes out and did other inhuman things.
Given the oppurnity I would use DEADLY force against these people.
And you would go to jail for a very long time for doing so.

Freedomv
August 17, 2006, 01:15 PM
I voted for Myself & family, however it would depend on very many variables be sides if it would be a legal or "Good shoot".

Such as the mood that I may be in at the time. (This will probably open a can of worms) and who I may be protecting and the situation.

I'm no hero and hope and pray that I never have to make such a decision as to draw a weapon (although I have) and to fire it with intent to kill a person.

Vern

M2 Carbine
August 17, 2006, 01:20 PM
And you would go to jail for a very long time for doing so.

Very unlikely.

Self defense, you know.;)


But that's another subgect.

M2 Carbine
August 17, 2006, 01:33 PM
I would protect my family and me, that's it. Everyone else has the same opportunity to attend training classes and get issued a CHP. If they chose not to, that's at their peril. I don't think they should expect me to "save them" and go through all of the legal aspects of the shooting if they chose not to equip themselves to defend against an aggressor. Just my 1/50th of a dollar.


In these kind of threads, this attitude always confounds me.
Apparently the thinking is, It's OK with me if my wife or child were being killed and no one tried to save them, I don't think anyone should come to their aid because it's their fault that they can't protect themselves.

Lupinus
August 17, 2006, 01:34 PM
And you would go to jail for a very long time for doing so.
Depends on the area and what they were doing to the animal

If you come across someone torturing animals, and in the process of doing so to an animal, then in some areas you just might be able to legally use deadly force to stop them.

ryoushi
August 17, 2006, 02:58 PM
This old guy was a huge part of our family. If anybody had ever tried to hurt him I'd have reflexively killed them.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3588/1277/320/Dusty.jpg

Stauble
August 17, 2006, 04:12 PM
:my friends and family without a dout
if i see some guy hurting some else, espescially if the other person is smaller, or if its a girl, im not just gunna sit and watch, i feel i have a responsibility to try and help the weaker person. Bad things happen when good people stand by and do nothing.
the only pet i would ever kill to save is my own

Knowing that doing so won't protect yourself from civil consequences

thank God i live in the Gunshine state :cool:

clipse
August 17, 2006, 04:19 PM
Me, my family, and my friends. I may be selfish but I believe every person has a right to defend themselves. People know that you can own guns and even carry concealed in most states. If they don't, then thats on them. Thats thier choice just as its my choice to only protect those that are close to me.

That was my thinking and vow when I first got my CCW. I don't carry a gun to be a hero. I carry my gun to protect those I love.

clipse

.45FMJoe
August 17, 2006, 05:18 PM
It's a real shame the law says I can't kill to protect my dog.


I'll take my chances with the DA.





"Officer, look what he did to my <cat,dog,wife,son,pickup truck,etc...>. I thought I was next, I was in fear for my life."


Exactly. If you don't believe me just ask him. Err..... yea.

Hypnogator
August 17, 2006, 06:46 PM
All.

More specifically, all excluding pets.

I swore an oath to do just that many years ago. Don't get paid for it nowadays, but being a cop isn't something you do -- it's something you are.

Jim March
August 17, 2006, 07:27 PM
I answered number six back in '97 with my hand on a knife. No regrets.

There are however two caveats:

1) Never get between two parties that still want a piece of each other. Ever. Period.

2) If the situation isn't clear, do a verbal challenge. They'll tell you exactly what's up.

usp9
August 18, 2006, 09:01 AM
that it depends on where you live. Parts of the country are decidedly ANTI-gun, while other areas are on the other end of the specrtum. Given similar circumstances, authorities arriving at an "incident" may respond with "you're under arrest" or "nice shot...what are you carrying". How far we would go to protect others is probably correlated to the prevailing "gun culture" of the region. Just a thought.

Avizpls
August 18, 2006, 09:28 AM
When you walk up on a situation in progress, you have no idea what's going on. "Actor A" could be an undercover cop and "Actor B" could be a murderer or crack dealer being arrested for all you know.

If that is the case and you jump in, you have just bought yourself a world of hurt - probably felony charges of obstruction of justice, pointing a firearm at a police officer, criminal confinement and whatever else the prosecutor's office can come up with.

If that is the case, you can kiss your gun collection - and probably your home, family and freedom - goodbye.

Take care of you and yours, and let others do the same or suffer the consequences of being unprepared, unarmed sheeple. The sheeple say, "The police will protect me, there's no need to own a gun." Since they believe that, let them live by it.

That may sound harsh, but I have some bad news, folks: Reality is harsh.

Just my thoughts on the subject - YMMV.



Woth re-posting. Its almost exactly what I would have said

Mandirigma
August 18, 2006, 04:18 PM
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=216383


Not referring to the article, but to the replies to the main topic. Not trying to pick anyone out. It seems to me, that for every attaboy, there's someone saying. "Was it really worth it?"

cbsbyte
August 18, 2006, 04:29 PM
In Mass CCW laws make it nearly impossible to use force to stop an attack against someone other than against yourself and/or family when in public. The law is written that one carrying a weapon, must try to retreat before using deadly force in public. I don't know how that would play out if you tried to stop an old lady being mugged on the street by confronting the mugger and shooting him. It most likley would be settled in court, and hopefully in the shooters favor. When visiting friend/family in their home it would be different and probably justifiable in most cases. I believe that most state CCW laws have written rules of ingagment that plainly state that a CCW carrier is not a cop, and should not try to get involved in situation they are not part off.

Bergerboy
August 18, 2006, 05:38 PM
I voted for "All".

I was raised a certain way, a way based upon the saying "Do unto others as you wish to be done upon". If someone needs help, I stop and help them. I always hope that if I needed help, someone would do the same for me. I've had some great experiences and some bad ones, but am not regretful of my attitude.

If my father, mother, or wife were in public and someone was intent on harming them, I would pray that someone would help protect them. If put in the situation where I may be able to help a stranger, I would do the same.

ronto
August 18, 2006, 06:31 PM
I think I would have a difficult time in court trying to explain why I shot someone posing a deadly threat to my dog....Now if he pulled the trigger...that's a different story...Hmmm...how about "Temporary Insanity".

M2 Carbine
August 18, 2006, 07:09 PM
I believe that most state CCW laws have written rules of ingagment that plainly state that a CCW carrier is not a cop, and should not try to get involved in situation they are not part off.

In Texas you can use deadly force to protect a stranger the same as you can use deadly force to protect yourself.
I love Texas law.:)

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
~ ~ (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
~ ~ (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated; and
~ ~ (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
~ ~ ~ (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
~ ~ ~ (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
~ (b) [added 9/1/95] The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not apply to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time of the use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the actor.


Sec. 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third person if:
~ ~ (1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31 or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
~ ~ (2) the actor reasonably believes that his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

M2 Carbine
August 18, 2006, 07:15 PM
All EXCEPT Pets
I think I would have a difficult time in court trying to explain why I shot someone posing a deadly threat to my dog....Now if he pulled the trigger...that's a different story...Hmmm...how about "Temporary Insanity".

In Texas you can use deadly force to protect property.
My pets are my property.;)

akodo
August 18, 2006, 07:28 PM
I am a big animal lover, but I just cannot wrap my head around choosing to kill a person to defend an animal, even a beloved pet. Sure, if someone kills your dog as a way to threaten you, to me that is different because you aren't defending/avenging your dog, you are defending yourself.


as far as the example of the guy lighting the dog on fire, I'd shoot the dog to put it out of it's misery, and call the cops.

Depends on the area and what they were doing to the animal

If you come across someone torturing animals, and in the process of doing so to an animal, then in some areas you just might be able to legally use deadly force to stop them.

I'd really like to to cite these laws that allow you to kill a human who was torturing animals

BergaminoCAV
August 18, 2006, 07:42 PM
After being in the army I hope I never have to point a gun at anyone ever again... But if it came down to that certain situation I would protect my family ( I include my bestfriends in the family category), and myself.

el44vaquero
August 18, 2006, 08:06 PM
Some parts of the country it's perfectly legal to shoot a man beating or trying to steal your horse.

rangermonroe
August 18, 2006, 08:28 PM
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I understood the question of lethal force to "against another human being".

If so, then I am quite disturbed by the number of folks who have decided to use deadly force to protect pets.

I love my hound, but between, you, me, and she...she takes the dirt nap.

I suspect asking the same question, swapping 'pets' for the '2nd ammendment', would have far fewer votes.

Twycross
August 18, 2006, 08:37 PM
To answer the original question, I would use lethal force to defend anyone, with the exception of pets. Even the most heinous cruelty to an animal is not worth killing over. Human life is inherently worth more than animal life, even if the human in question is a dirtbag.

I am young, idealistic, and without any dependents or important external obligations. If/when I go, it will be just me and my stuff. I would not expect those with other responsibilities to answer as I am.

ronto
August 18, 2006, 11:05 PM
If you can legally kill someone for threatening your dog with lethal force or beating your horse then it logically follows that it is a capital crime in Texas to do so.
How many people have benn executed in Texas for threatening a dog with lethal force or beating a horse?
It may be the law... but it makes no sense.

BergaminoCAV
August 18, 2006, 11:11 PM
Isnt there a Make My Day law in some states where if some one threatens you on your property you can shoot them dead? I would think that term shhot dead might vary from state to state haha

nfl1990
August 18, 2006, 11:19 PM
I like my animals better than most people ...

+1
And I agree with the poster who said the dog would die to defend you, don't you owe him the same.

akodo
August 18, 2006, 11:58 PM
And I agree with the poster who said the dog would die to defend you, don't you owe him the same.

no you don't because he is a dog and you are a human.


i'd really like to see this actual law that allows someone to use deadly force if someone is beating the shototer's horse.

cassandrasdaddy
August 19, 2006, 12:39 AM
1981 franklin
sunday afternoon guy shoots neighbor dead in driveway in front of 20 witnesses. dead guy had shot his dog day before outa "meaness" walkaway after investigation couldn't get him to trial.

if someone was attacking a stranger and i bailed i couldn't live with it. i regard it as getting them before they get to my kin.

lacoochee
August 19, 2006, 01:10 AM
My dogs guard my home, if they are dead it's because some son of a b... wants to kill me and my familiy...that's how I see it, they die that moment. In so far as the threat goes legally, it depends on how you look at it doesn't it? If you are merely about your business with a dog/pet on a leash and a stranger pulls a gun and he shoots or shoots at your dog wouldn't you assume you are next? Once that person pulled/brandishes a deadly weapon wouldn't the average person not even knowing at that point who the weapon is for assumed they are the target? If the average person believes that they were threatened with deadly harm would that not meet the legal definition of self-defense (at least in Florida)?

M2 Carbine
August 19, 2006, 03:23 AM
TEXAS LAW
If you can legally kill someone for threatening your dog with lethal force or beating your horse then it logically follows that it is a capital crime in Texas to do so.
How many people have benn executed in Texas for threatening a dog with lethal force or beating a horse?
It may be the law... but it makes no sense.

Your logic is flawed.

Because deadly force can be used at the time the crime is being committed, that doesn't automatically make it a "capital crime".
For instance, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery aren't "capital crimes" but you can sure use deadly force to stop them.

I think our laws make a lot of sense.
Just don't be a BG and you probably won't get shot.

TimboKhan
August 19, 2006, 03:41 AM
I take a hard line on this issue. I believe, quite strongly, that if you do not have the mindset to use deadly force, you shouldn't even bother with a defensive weapon. A point hammered in repeatedly to me while I was in the Marines is that there is no such thing as a "warning shot". As cold-hearted as this may sound, my mindset is that I will either not shoot at all or I will shoot to kill. period. Drawing the gun in and of itself is the warning, and I would hope that if it came down to that, drawing would be enough. If not, well, I am aiming center mass. If you are of the mindset that you will shoot them in the leg and hope for the best, I very much feel that you are not mentally prepared to defend yourself, your home or your family with a firearm. Now, that being said, I am not a violent or bloodthirsty person. I have no desire to kill anyone, and I really hope I will never have to do so again (combat experience, thus the "again"). I guess to sum things up, in my mind training to defend yourself isn't just about marksmanship and tactics. Neither of those will serve you particularly well if you haven't mentally conditioned yourself as well.

ronto
August 19, 2006, 10:31 AM
M2 Carbine,
I think YOUR logic is flawed. Your examples cite crimes against people NOT animals.
For example, if I steal your dogs bone (Robbery) then that means you can shoot me while the "crime" is being committed?
Killing someone that is THREATENING your dog with lethal force still makes no sense.
If I witnessed someone that actually killed my dog for no reason and I had a gun I don't know exactly what I would do but it's highly likely that would be the last dog they killed. To my mind, that's the right thing to do but I don't think the law would or SHOULD agree.

Geno
August 19, 2006, 10:38 AM
He's right, you don't know who or what or why a stranger is doing X. The person with a pistol in hand, may have just taken out the bad guy who shot the clerk five seconds before you entered the store. Heck, he or she might even be an off-duty cop. Family only, or close friends who you know and are with (i.e. out for diner or movie).

Doc2005

.45FMJoe
August 19, 2006, 11:23 AM
Some of these responses are mind boggling. Let me rephrase that, some of these responses are nauseating. I would be willing to bet money that 90% of the posters in this thread have participated, outside of this thread, in one or more "self-defense scenario threads." In said threads, people puff their chests behind their keyboards and tell of how they would not hesitate to kill a human being who was placing them or their loved ones in danger. Yet now they are saying that they value human life more than that of an animal. You will never find a more loyal, faithful companion than an animal and you people would toss that aside for any human life - even one who doesn't deserve existance. Pure hypocracy, and I find it revolting. We have enough human overpopulation as is...

M2 Carbine
August 19, 2006, 11:27 AM
He's right, you don't know who or what or why a stranger is doing X. The person with a pistol in hand, may have just taken out the bad guy who shot the clerk five seconds before you entered the store. Heck, he or she might even be an off-duty cop. Family only, or close friends who you know and are with (i.e. out for diner or movie).


One of the recurring qualifiers, through out the thread, has been is that it is OBVIOUS that what you are seeing requires the use of deadly force by you. Then whether or not you act is your decision.

That is one reason that in the Texas statutes deadly force isn't allowed to be used to stop a kidnapping but is allowed in a aggravated kidnapping.
The difference being that the kidnapping (of a child) you witness could be an estranged parent and the child isn't in any real danger.
Deadly force is allowed in a "aggravated kidnapping" (when a weapon is used) is allowed for obvious reasons.

I haven't seen anyone here, who says that they would only protect their families, say they would pat a stranger on the back for doing the right thing, if he just stood by as their wife or children were killed.

Medusa
August 19, 2006, 12:49 PM
Local law also allows to use deadly force to protect the strangers, but is pretty strict - the situation must be such that actually may need using a deadly force. Though, vocal threats and waving knives aren't considered as a threat of bodily harm :barf: :banghead: :cuss: , not allowing the use of deadly force. But a LEO told me that pulling the gun on bastard is allowed, if presentation of gun stops the crime I wouldn't be in any legal hazzle, but if I pulled the gun and the BG still attacked I would be allowed to use it, using common sense and clear judgement, later I'd still must be ready to explain the situation and why I did find it nessesary to shoot the bastard
.
Otherwise mostly me&family, but also every other people, if situation is clear and I wouldn't be legally canned later. Saving somebody from mugging isn't worth leaving my wife and kid alone for years.

KD5NRH
August 19, 2006, 01:08 PM
For example, if I steal your dogs bone (Robbery) then that means you can shoot me while the "crime" is being committed?

Depends; is it nighttime?

FWIW, threatening the dog would probably fall under criminal mischief for the purposes of this section as well, since TX defines several varieties of CM for damaging animals.

Texas Penal Code Section 9.42
DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

gulogulo1970
August 19, 2006, 02:21 PM
I voted for Family, Freinds and Pets. I couldn't vote all just because you never know who is the bad guy is. I guess I'd have to vote, depends on the situation.

I would have to say that I too would use deadly force to stop someone harming my pets, they are family as well.

Well, there is one of my wife's dogs, I might let it slide just once. ;)

Phenom
August 19, 2006, 02:47 PM
I will lay down my life in an instant for anything I care about.

Lone_Gunman
August 19, 2006, 02:53 PM
If you kill someone who killed your pet, you better hope I am not on your jury.

ronto
August 19, 2006, 03:25 PM
KD5NRH,
Thank you for posting the complete law. It looks like you could legally shoot someone ,even a minor, who steals your apples (CM) as long as it's night time.
Just wondering if you know if there are actually many justifyable homicides that occur under this law and any statistics that show a decrease in these types of crimes since it was enacted.
It appears it would not be a smart move to be a thief in Texas...but most criminals are not known for their high IQ.

M2 Carbine
August 19, 2006, 04:04 PM
FWIW, threatening the dog would probably fall under criminal mischief for the purposes of this section as well, since TX defines several varieties of CM for damaging animals.

Some animals are quite valuable monetarily and could be looked at (I suppose) as valuable property.

The law says nothing about the value of the property and can be no more than what's in your wallet that you are using deadly force to protect.

I haven't heard of any cases where deadly force was used to protect a pet but I'm sure there are some. It would be interesting to know if the defense was to protect property, CM or what.

ronto KD5NRH,
Thank you for posting the complete law. It looks like you could legally shoot someone ,even a minor, who steals your apples (CM) as long as it's night time.
Just wondering if you know if there are actually many justifyable homicides that occur under this law and any statistics that show a decrease in these types of crimes since it was enacted.
It appears it would not be a smart move to be a thief in Texas...but most criminals are not known for their high IQ.

There are many cases of thieves being killed attempting to steal cars, caught in the middle of a robbery or burglary, etc.

I don't hear much about CM. Everyone knows that you don't go on someone's property and act up, especially at night, because it's very likely to get you shot .

A few years ago in Houston a guy was drunk and banging on a homeowners front and back door. The homeowner, fearing a home invasion, shot and killed the drunk through the back door. It was ruled a justifiable shooting.

Zach S
August 19, 2006, 04:15 PM
First, myself and my family. No question there.

Friends, probably. I'd have to be in the situation before I could make that call. However most of my friends are considered family, friends that arent family are just co-workers. I kinda like the solitude.

My pets, yes, if they were in danger of another animal. I dont see myself using deadly force against a two-legged critter to protect my dogs, strictly for legality reasons.

Total strangers are a grey area.

Phenom
August 19, 2006, 05:06 PM
A life is a life as far as I'm concerned, whether it's human or animal. It's far safer to meet a Grizzly robbed of her cubs than to hurt someone I care about.

gezzer
August 19, 2006, 11:51 PM
PETS? Your kidding right.

Nitrogen
August 20, 2006, 12:30 AM
I voted "Myself, Family, and Friends", basically anyone that would risk jail for my safety, i'd risk jail for theirs.

Phenom
August 20, 2006, 07:39 AM
Who Me? No I'm not kidding. If you have have an animal pet for a while do you look at it as something expendable? No you don't, you look the pet as a part of you family. If you don't then there's something really wrong with you upstairs. Animals have feelings too you know.

22-rimfire
August 20, 2006, 08:24 AM
I second the You have got to be kidding, PETS? I believe extending the practice of protection with deadly force outside yourself and immediate family is a great way to be thrown into prison.

BoomBoom25
August 20, 2006, 08:31 AM
I would use deadly force to protect my family and friends no matter what. I would say it depends for strangers and pets. I would use deadly force for instance to protect my pets if it were a wild animal or somthing of that nature attacking them. A stranger it all depends, it depends od the enviroment, whats going on at the time and what kind of threat the stranger is facing. If it were a sitiuation were my life could eventuallybe at risk then of course I would use deadly force. For anyone who truly beleives in using deadly force i suggest taking some kind of self defense course, Thunder Ranch by the way has a great one if you can find the time and money.

cassandrasdaddy
August 20, 2006, 02:32 PM
someone hurting one of the critters is about to dance with me anyway and if they arecrazy enough to do it with me there they are crazy enough to hurt real bad.
if someone hurt the critters while i was away i would respond differently, maybe not better but different

Lone_Gunman
August 20, 2006, 02:46 PM
Sounds like you don't mind spending some time in jail for murder.

I don't understand people who equate human life with animal life. They aren't equal. Thats why hamburgers are made out of cows, not relatives.

AF_INT1N0
August 20, 2006, 03:01 PM
I vote for me and mine. Ideally strangers should have thier own plan to defend themselves. IN practice however defending strangers in public could be part of the protecting yourself plan. ie. someone is robbing a store, shooting the robber is protecting yourself, but probably saved the clerk and any other bystanders.

On the other hand; putting myself into harms way to defend someone who is unwilling to protect themselves is in most cases not going to happen. Cops get paid to do that, I get sued for it.

grislyatoms
August 20, 2006, 03:01 PM
Not knowing the circumstances, kinda hard to answer.

My daughter, close family and friends, that's a no-brainer. I would use whatever level of force necessary. A good portion of my close family and nearly all of my good friends are able to take care of themselves, though.

Acquaintances, strangers, etc. would depend on the circumstances.

akodo
August 20, 2006, 04:11 PM
If you have have an animal pet for a while do you look at it as something expendable? No you don't, you look the pet as a part of you family. If you don't then there's something really wrong with you upstairs. Animals have feelings too you know.

two news events regarding pets. A guy threw a pet dog from a window of a moving car. It made me sick, I am glad he ended up in jail for it. I would NOT have shot him to stop his actions.

A man stood outside his girlfriend's apartment, snapped the neck of a puppy and thew it in a dumpster, the did the same thing again, while telling the woman he would snap her neck too. I am glad he ended up in jail for both terroristic threats as well as animal cruelty. I would NOT have shot him to stop him from killing another puppy, but I would have shot him had he tried to approach the woman in question.

Animals have feelings too you know
yes and no.
I hope you never drive or ride in any sort of vehicle. Over the course of 1 mile that vehicle probably kills 100 animals...bugs hitting it.

so in the name of 'animals have feelings too!' do you believe it is all right to shoot a farmer loading his pigs to bring to slaughter? shoot a guy who works with mice in a research lab?

I have some personal experience with this. A friend of mine's dog gave birth to some puppies, he lived in a rough neighborhood. Right about at the time that the puppies were old enough to go to homes on their own, he came home and they were stolen, suspicioon being that they were to be sold not as pets but to people to use to train pitbulls to kill. He bribed some local kids to find out what happened and where most of them were. They told him where the theif lived. He called the cops, filed a report, etc. told them where the theif lived. Nothing, so he went down there to look around for himself. Found pups in the back yard. Called cops, not an emergency, would send someone out later. Pups reconginzed him all 5 in a back yard ran over, reached over the fence and picked up two of them and brought them to his truck, put them in and locked it, went back for the others, who were barking and jumping because they remembered him. Just as he picked one up a male age 15-19 came out the back door of the house (probably alerted by the puppy barking). My friend grabbed the pup and started running, the guy yelled and picked up a long broom handle and began chasing him. My friend did not have time to fish out his keys and get in his truck, so he just kept on running with the pup in his arms. The guy chased him for blocks, and eventually got close enough to whack him with the pole which sent my friend tumbling to the ground dropping the pup. He rolled over and drew his handgun (which he did not have a CCW for, but in these circumstances, decided to wear anyways, hand a inside the wastband holster from carrying as a bartenter) and found the attacker with pole raised ready to rain down another blow. He yelled 'LEAVE ME ALONE' and the man dropped the pole and ran. My friend grabbed the pup and left the area, called me on his cell to come pick him up. I did and dropped him off at his truck (it was parked about a block away from where the theif lived) we peeked back over the fence, the other 2 pups were no where around, and a pitbull was chained to a pole in the yard. I saw what to me looked like pitbull training stuff, treadmill, big rope from tree, etc.

I think it was reasonable to use the threat of force on the man about to hit him a second time with a club, or even deadly force had the guy not immediately stopped the attack. I don't think it would have been reasonable to shoot the man to allow him to rescue all 5 pups from being pitbull bait.

lacoochee
August 20, 2006, 10:59 PM
If I responded with deadly force after my pet/dog was killed it would not because the dog/pet was killed in and of itself (tragic though it may be) it's because any reasonable human being would expect they are next. If I came home and found my pets killed that would engender an entirely different response... It's hard to imagine a case where I would not feel threatened with deadly force where my animal was being killed assuming I even KNEW my pet was the target of the criminal.

Glock_10mm
August 20, 2006, 11:08 PM
Anyone (human) who I felt was under threat of death. Its just that simple, however my state also backs this opinion.:neener:

I would not protect my dog/pet though with lethal force but I would bring apt defense. It may seem cruel, but I would see that they rot in jail, but I wouldnt kill them for killing my dog/pet. I have to agree though, if a criminal killed my dog/pet in front of me, I would know the criminal was capable, and would fear I was next...then its a different situation....depends how it played out!

blackhawk2000
August 20, 2006, 11:56 PM
You are a fool if you protect a stranger. Trust me it's not worth it. I know this for a fact.

I'm an electrician, and the guy I work with keeps thinking I'm going to help him, if the SHTF. We work in some pretty shady areas. I tell him, I'm not his bodyguard, and to get his own CCW.

Your duty is to keep on providing for your family. If you can get away, without drawing/shooting, do it. Call 911, and get out. The person who needs saving should have prepared for that day, like the rest of us already do. If you can safely get away, do it.

One minute you are saving that stranger, the next minute, they are lying to the Police, and you are getting a ride to jail.

Phenom
August 21, 2006, 06:24 PM
Well Akodo, Farmers don't look at pigs as pets. All the farmers I know use a small caliber pistol to execute the animals so the animals don't feel it. I've had to put down animals that were very ill in the past. I don't like killing but will if I absolutely need too. I won't stand by and watch a person or animal get victimized.

Kurt S.
August 21, 2006, 09:25 PM
I hate myself for saying it: I would only use deadly force on another human being to defend my own family or myself. Even if you don't have anything, you have too much to lose these days.

In another place and time, I'd have no compunctions about defending a stranger.

If I am ever unlucky enough to be CCWing and end up in the middle of an armed robbery, my plan is to be quiet, draw, take cover and aim carefully. Retain situational awareness in case of lookouts.

Anybody who wants to heap scorn on me, I understand.

cassandrasdaddy
August 21, 2006, 09:34 PM
for puppy abusers
the ira had great sucess with this form of behavior modification

akodo
August 22, 2006, 12:19 AM
Well Akodo, Farmers don't look at pigs as pets. All the farmers I know use a small caliber pistol to execute the animals so the animals don't feel it. I've had to put down animals that were very ill in the past. I don't like killing but will if I absolutely need too. I won't stand by and watch a person or animal get victimized.

That's just it, a pet is just an animal. Now, it is a specific animal that you have imbued with love and care, etc etc, but that doesn't change what it is, and that is an animal.

To me treating a pet differently than just any other animal with regards to how to value it against human life is wrong. It's like saying 'it's not worth shooting someone over personal property...unless it is a family heirloom or your favorite motorcycle or something else you have lavished love on'


I also don't understand your last line. If some stranger were set on killing your dog in a relatively humane way you'd be fine with it, but a non-humane way, and you'd kill him?

Nope.


Now of course depending on the circumstances, killing a pet is probably going to be take as a personal threat, but then you aren't defending/avenging your pet, but protecting yourself, which is a whole different ballgame

Diamondback6
August 22, 2006, 02:01 AM
My answer's a little complicated.

First, a little background. By definition, the few friends I have I consider family--"anyone not worth eating a killshot for isn't worth calling a friend". Also, I tend to believe that when someone has shown me loyalty, I have a duty to return it unless what that ask violates my own core values.

So, I guess the only guarantee for me is "self, family (including friends) and those who have fought for me in the past or would if roles were reversed"--everyone else (human) is in a "depends on the situation" scenario and varies by my gut-check and tactical analysis at that moment.

Phenom
August 22, 2006, 07:44 AM
You need to learn how to read. If an animal is terminally ill or fubared then it best for the animal to be put down. You're the only one that's saying that I would kill right away.

Baba Louie
August 22, 2006, 08:10 AM
...a pet is just an animal...A man, woman or child is only an animal, too and No good deed goes unpunished.
While I am not a saviour of society, I will protect my family and domecile if and when need be at all costs. My life isn't worth as much as my kid's lives, now that they're off and grown and fend for themselves, the urge or spark to defend my life voraciously isn't as hot, all the time as it was when they needed me daily.

Circumstances might force me to defend a critter... from a pack of feral dogs or catamount when on the trail.

If in the city, should I fear for my pet's safety from a vicious canine loose, at large and attacking, I'd probably do something stupid and step in between the two... then it might become my life I'm protecting from a wild animal, does it not?

Strong urge to protect life, not take it. Hope I never have to face the choice. Hope I'm ready if need be. Got the tools and training. Situations vary. A lawyer with every bullet. (I didn't mean that the way it sounds... I think. Some of my best friends are lawyers.)

Sinsaba
August 22, 2006, 11:02 AM
I would protect any person against deadly force if I KNEW that the situation was indeed as it appears. However, as much as I love them, I would not do so for my pets. It does appear to me however that if someone is using deadly force against my cats inside my house that I would have a level of fear that I was next.

That said, the "knowing" of the situation would be much easier if it were just me, a little bit harder if it were me and my wife, ... etc. To the point that if it was a total stranger I might not help as I wasn't positive that I understood the situation.

MBane666
August 22, 2006, 11:43 AM
Who would I use deadly force to protect?

Sarah Michelle Geller!:D

Sorry, sorry...I know this is a serious thread, but I just couldn't resist a little lighthearted response. Also, remember that everything you write on-line is discoverable in a trial!

Michael B

Phenom
August 22, 2006, 12:08 PM
The likely hood of me using deadly force is slim too none. Atleast I hope I never have to.

If you enjoyed reading about "Who would you use deadly force to protect?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!