Public range safety concern

[medic15al]

NVM not worth arguing over.

 

[medic15al]

Someone needs to seriously consider whether you should remain a member on THR.

Guess what, shooting ranges have a certain danger built into them. You weren't being "attacked". You knew it, your buddy knew it and the jury would know it.

Instead, you were deciding to use lethal force to deal with a communications problem in a dangerous activity you voluntarily took part in. You can no more shoot at some idiot at a gun range than you can shoot the crane operator on a construction site.

You are a dangerous person advocating an incredibly bad idea. I can only hope you go to jail for attempted murder rather than the real thing, and that no one is foolish enough to take any advice from you.

I see now you are only trolling.

 

[WestKentucky]

No, I do NOT know he wasn't shooting at me. I wouldn't go to jail because I already had to defend myself from the very same situation with my best friend. We were the only persons there and a raging person drove up and opened fire on us. He was caught seeking care for a GSW and also convicted of killing his girlfriend as well as attempted murder times two for us.

Get your head out of your behind and realize you don't ask someone nicely if they are going to hurt you or was just goofing off when you are being shot at. His actions were reasonable as were mine. You have no idea of how laws are applied and are spouting off going on your emotions.

If this warrants kicking me off then so be it.

Sucks you had to be there but that's exactly the situation I was picturing you thinking you were in while reading your explanation. Between situations like that and the Chris Kyle murder scenarios you can't be sure. Ever. Laws are written differently from state to state and most of them play into the PERCIEVED threat to a person defending himself, or the ACTUAL threat of defending someone else.

And buddy if you go I go.

 

[medic15al]

Sucks you had to be there but that's exactly the situation I was picturing you thinking you were in while reading your explanation. Between situations like that and the Chris Kyle murder scenarios you can't be sure. Ever. Laws are written differently from state to state and most of them play into the PERCIEVED threat to a person defending himself, or the ACTUAL threat of defending someone else.

And buddy if you go I go.

Thanks WestKentucky! Its good to know I don't stand alone.

 

[boom boom]

Not trying to add fuel on the fire but----

The law of self defence requires an objective standard to view a threat--not an individual's perception of what is reasonable. There are many cases where the person killed someone and claimed self defense but the jury and judge disagreed. Result is a prison term. Please do not claim that just a perceived threat can be justification as it has to be a reasonable perceived threat to an objective onlooker.

What is reasonable comes from the law (both statute and caselaw) and from the totality of circumstances known to the individual at the time. My humble guess (not a legal opinion) on the sparse facts and applying a general knowledge of self defense statutes and caselaw is that one would face serious consequences both criminal and civil for shooting back toward the firing line. If you really want to know the answer, propose that question to either Mas Ayoob, Mitch Vilos, or Andrew Branca. Alternatively, ask your local DA or asst. DA about your hypothetical and see how they would answer.

BTW Andrew has a Law of Self Defense Blog and Mas has one on the Backwoods Home Guide. Both are recommended.

 

[Art Eatman]

This has gone from concern over down-range safety to squabbling about behavior. Enuf.