1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Idiotic News Story - what would you do?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Jslap, Nov 1, 2008.

  1. Jslap

    Jslap New Member

    <Previously posted in Legal section; moved over here...>

    Here, our liberal local news, KSLA does an idiotic story on a guy who beats up on a girl - and asks, what would you do?

    The KSLA office staff goes to a local park, with a huge 300 lb man choking on a woman who is screaming her head off. As cameras roll, they show folks not lifting a hand to help.

    I wrote them, informing them that the man is fortunate to be alive, because he would be swiftly staring down the barrel of my Glock if I were present.

    I believe these kinds of news stories are asinine to say the least. They put law abiding concealed weapons holders like myself in a situation to draw down on someone. I never intend to draw down on someone unless I plan to shoot, so that actor's life would have been dependent on how quick he dropped to the ground after pulling down on him.

    Again - IDIOTIC!

    Link to news story: http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?s=9273757
  2. General Geoff

    General Geoff Well-Known Member

    At the point where the attacking actor had a belt around her neck, a passerby would probably have been justified in shooting the guy. Very, very stupid stunt to pull.

    FWIW I would have drawn on the guy strangling the woman, loudly and clearly demanded for him to stop, and if he continued, probably would have shot the guy.
  3. Treo

    Treo member

    That's exactly the type of vigilante w/ a gun response we don'tneed to be sending to the antis. I'm not saying it's not appropriate to intervene, but the chest thumping does nothing but reinforce to the antis that we're all a bunch of internet tough guys just waiting for an excuse to unload on somebody.

    I want to be clear here, I don't think the idea of armed intervention is wrong but the response to the news crew could be discounted as posturing.
  4. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    So Treo, would you let him kill her then??

  5. Byron Quick

    Byron Quick Moderator In Memoriam


    Seems that he answered your question in his post to begin with.
  6. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    I was asking Treo what he would do, nothing personal. Just want to hear what he thinks the right action is should someone comes across such an event.

  7. ants

    ants Well-Known Member


    Treo told you in his post.

    As I read Treo's post, it would be reasonable that Treo would use best judgement on a case-by-case basis, and the circumstances as presented in the video enactment would validate armed intervention.
  8. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    The case was the one that the original poster posted. I just want to know exactly what Treo would do in the case posted?? This isn't a personal attack, just an inqiury as to what Treo would have done in this situation.

    Generalized comments like "case by case" are excluded when you have a situation that has allready happened. I just want to know what he would have done with the cameras rolling.???

  9. nc76

    nc76 Well-Known Member

    The reasonable thing to do would be observe and make sure he was not choking her b/c she was trying to shoot or stab him first. The second thing would be approach with caution and request him to cease is actions. Third thing would be to draw on him and tell him to step back. Then you would have to do what your gut told you to do.

    Of course all this would probably happen instantaneously as you try to deduce the situtation
  10. Matt-J2

    Matt-J2 Well-Known Member

    The question is somewhat irrelevant, since Treo wasn't discussing the situation, rather he was discussing the response to the news story.
    A more relevant question would be: 'How would you have responded to this story?'

    Myself, were I inclined to write a letter to the news agency, is that the well being of the actor could have been placed seriously at risk. While nobody actually responded, someone could have responded violently to the 'attacker', and only asked questions after the actress was deemed to no longer be in any danger. Responses could have ranged from simple physical assault to assault with any manner of weapon. I would consider them to be irresponsible in the handling of employees in pursuit of a story.
  11. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    My own point of view is that just like first aide people shouldn't be held accountable for trying to help.

    If the media is filming this event and they do nothing to help then they are criminal to say the least.
    How could the media make us look bad when they stand by and do nothing while someone is being killed. We look worse if we do nothing.

  12. 30-06 lover

    30-06 lover Well-Known Member

    I saw one of these on ABC once and thought "Lawsuite waiting to happen." Kind of like putting a motor cycle down...not if but when.
  13. slide

    slide Well-Known Member

    I'm very unclear whether the law would back me if I were to shoot the apparent aggressor here in my state.

    Here's a story to keep in mind. One day when General Patton was walking in NYC, he spotted a fem walking with some guy. A truck stopped next to the two, some guys ran out the truck, grabbed the fem up. The man with her tried to intervene. The guys from the truck roughed the man up & dragged the fem into their truck.

    Patton pulled his piece and intervened by demanding a halt to the action. It turned out that the fem was being 'turned out' by the guy she was with (a pimp) after she ran away from home. The truck guys were her brothers who were rescuing her from the pimp.

    Now I dunno if that story is literally true, but it may be and even if it isn't, it's a lesson for us to not go in shooting based on an assumption of what is happening and who the bad guy is.
  14. The Bushmaster

    The Bushmaster Well-Known Member

    jslap...It seems you may be a bit hot headed.

    Treo did answer your question before you asked it.

    I would have intervened also, but I would not have written a blustery letter to the editer...A calmly written letter to the editer stating politely that what they stagged in the park was out of line and could have caused unwanted circumstances would have done the trick......
  15. Treo

    Treo member

    WWTD (What Would Treo Do)

    Treo isn't sure what his response would be, but he is positive that riding to the rescue like the cavalry would be a bad thing. Especially if one wasn't completely sure what exactly was transpiring.

    Let's suppose Treo decided there was obviously cause to employ deadly force. How do you think Treo would feel (even if he walked) after he found out that he had mistakenly shot an actor? :what:

    Do you think that Treo would still have his house or his car or his gun collection when the lawyers (both criminal and civil) got done with him (again even assuming he walks)?:(

    Treo thinks he would take it step by step and probably wouldn’t employ deadly force (or the threat thereof) with out a clear threat to life. Treo is also positive that sending an Internet tough guy letter to the editor wouldn’t advance the cause of RKBA an inch so he is positive he wouldn’t do that

    As a former EMT and current Medical Student Treo thinks the first aid question is much easier to answer, because Treo would know it was a put on before he was half way done taking vitals and accessing the patient. He might even play along and hook the actor up to an AED and tell everybody he was about to shock him, just to watch the actor come off the ground like a monkey with his butt on fire. :D
  16. jad0110

    jad0110 Well-Known Member

    This is not the first time something like this has happened. Most of us have heard about the idiotic, unannounced shooter drills some school districts perform. Maybe I am not being very highroad, but methinks that some of these little "performances" are thought up and put on by rabid antis hoping a CCW holder will intervene with deadly force, using the incident as a proxy to demonize all gunowners. I certainly don't believe that is true in all cases, but then again I wouldn't be all that surprised if that is the motive behind a small number of these instances.

    Or maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight :eek:.

    Note that I am not a lawyer, but in my state this would appear to justify the use of lethal force. Though this is a great example of why one should not intervene with deadly force unless they are 110% sure of the facts surrounding the specific conflict. It may be prudent to call LE and observe, depending on the situation. Or, as Treo indicated, non-lethal intervention may be the appropriate first option. Finally, deadly force may be immediately justified.

    I always enjoy reading threads like this. Running through possible scenarios and responses in one's mind is at least as important as trigger time, IMHO.
  17. Jslap

    Jslap New Member

    ..Points taken. I will endeavor in the future to not "let my emotions" carry me on posting here, or interacting with others.

    I DID NOT write a letter to the editor - just merely replied to the internet story on the news website linked above. Perhaps I could have been "nicer", or "more pleasant", but the sheer idiocy of the news report took me for a ride.

    At the same time - I think that it's healthy to analyze "what would I have done" in this particular situation. Perhaps I should have been more eloquent in isolating the steps in my opening post. Here's what I think I may have done:

    1. Yell - demand to desist.
    2. Draw on him - continue to yell.
    3. Is the woman continuing to be harmed - that is - is she choking literally to death?
    4. To be honest - if it came down to it - him choking with the belt, not letting up - I'd shoot the guy in the leg - He'd let up then.
    5. If he had a weapon, then I'd shoot to kill if he reached for it.

    There. I hope that's not "too vigilante" or "hotheaded". BUT - that's the steps I'd take.

    Thanks for the tip on interacting with non-gun guys. I'll keep that in mind.
  18. k-frame

    k-frame Well-Known Member


    I think it's about TV ratings - local broadcast news is first, last and always about entertainment.

    Oh, and the news crew took a horrible risk with those actors. A hothead with a weapon (i.e. untrained or unsure), someone with a well-trained attack dog, even an LEO could have inflicted irreparable harm.
  19. DFW1911

    DFW1911 Well-Known Member

    Some great points made so far.

    This "news" story is just a bad idea that could have turned into a series of unfortunate events. For what...ratings? How many lives could have been ruined due to someone's brilliant plan?

    I'm sure there is enough real news in Shreveport to cover and no need for news stations to stage such events.

    Completely irresponsible "journalism" in my view.


    Just my $.02.

    Take care,
  20. Treo

    Treo member

    If it really is an act that should stop it right there

    And you’d catch Hell trying to convince the D.A. that you were justified to use a lethal weapon to deliver non-lethal force. If deadly force is called for use deadly force. If deadly force isn’t called for don’t touch your weapon.

Share This Page