Perfect example of a gun used as a deterrent: Man saves Jewish family from hate attack

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aim1

member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,310
With the surge in antisemitic attacks it was fortunate that there was an armed citizen bystander who was able to protect this family. Apparently this was in Florida.

Many people don't realize how many lives are saved by gun owners merely using the gun as a deterrent and not actually firing it.



https://dailycaller.com/2021/05/21/jewish-family-gun-anti-semitic-florida/




Screenshot_20210521-183025_Chrome.jpg
 
Quoting within the article, hence the appearance of the double quotation / punctuation ...

'' “The guy in the car behind them saw everything go on,” Orgen told CBS12 News. “I saw him pull a gun and get in between — I mean he was almost there as our guardian angel just protecting us. I think once they saw him they just took off.” ''

Article doesn't elaborate, did 'good samaritan' pull gun to low ready or whatever. Did the 'g s' potentially brandish a firearm ? Sticky situation, is anyone from FL that can elaborate on FL statue.
I mean, the 'g s' responded to a perceived threat against 3rd person. But could have escalated an otherwise verbal lashing into much worse.

''Many people don't realize how many lives are saved by gun owners merely using the gun as a deterrent and not actually firing it.'' This is obviously the outcome and I M glad for all parties, just looking for some clarification.

Thank you
 
It appears the Jewish family was chassidic. Very distinctive clothing and a very peaceful sect that just want to be left alone. Similar to the attitude of the Amish, or Mormans.

I hate bullies.
Im 72, and no longer , a romping stomping Airborne Ranger, or
Street cop, but I would intervene if I saw a similar incident.
Presenting Mr 1911 can stop a lot of problem!
How much longer before JDL starts active patrols again?
 
I do not know Florida law, but in Pennsylvania that Good Samaritan could face brandishing charges if a prosecutor was overly zealous. In PA presenting a gun in the absence of a deadly threat is illegal. Verbal abuse does not amount to a deadly threat. Had I been in that situation in PA I would not have drawn my pistol. I would have been ready to do it if the need arose. I also would have called 911.
 
The only incident in my family of a firearm used to deter criminals involved my daughter-in-law showing a KelTec P11 to a pair of miscreants attempting to jimmy open a window on her ground floor apartment. No shots fired, no one injured, police called.

Props to the guy who got between the family and the thugs.
 
I can’t wait for a few particular moderators and legal “experts” to tell us all how this guy shouldn’t have done that.

In the meantime, this guy did a good thing and is a hero to that family. Forever. This world would be better with more people like him.

@Aim1 Thanks for posting. It’s a shame your threads get closed so soon.
 
I guess I'm not the only one that hates bullies

So glad I Live in a redneck town where the police chief ( who is black), and the mayor who is 1/2 Philippino and city prosecutor, ( red headed white guy), openly said brandishing a weapon to stop a hate crime, ( comes under in defense of others) will not be prosecuted. But Shots fired will go to the grand jury.

In other words we ain't tolerating that bovine excrement on our fellow citizens!

Oh, and the local temple has restared the JDL patrols. All are welcome to help.
I also got my sensei who I take cane /stick fighting lessons from and is Korean, to come to the senior center and speak.
 
More cajones than I. If I was still playing PoPo, I would have done something. I'm just another retired old phart now and the liability is ALL on my shoulders. Absent a physical attack, I would do nothing but observe.
 
4v50 Gary said:
More cajones than I. If I was still playing PoPo, I would have done something. I'm just another retired old phart now and the liability is ALL on my shoulders. Absent a physical attack, I would do nothing but observe.
Click to expand...

"I’m gonna rape your wife,” This old phart is armed and would have likely gave the bullies a verbal "move on A - holes", and showed them why they should if they decided to stay and continue. But then I have little to lose, and could care less if I had to spend my time in the crowbar hotel. (no chest beating intended)
 
BigBore44 said:
I can’t wait for a few particular moderators and legal “experts” to tell us all how this guy shouldn’t have done that.
Click to expand...
I cannot speak to the laws in Florida, but here in Colorado depending on the exact nature of the disturbance drawing a gun could land you a felony. I'm not saying not to help someone in need, I'm saying know your local laws and be careful how you go about it. I'm not saying he was wrong, again, I don't know the law in Florida, I'm just saying, be careful out there. It's a damn strange world we live in right now.
 
Robert said:
I cannot speak to the laws in Florida, but here in Colorado depending on the exact nature of the disturbance drawing a gun could land you a felony. I'm not saying not to help someone in need, I'm saying know your local laws and be careful how you go about it. I'm not saying he was wrong, again, I don't know the law in Florida, I'm just saying, be careful out there. It's a damn strange world we live in right now.
Click to expand...
One of the absolute best responses I’ve ever seen here on this subject. You were not who I was referring to. Thank you Robert.
 
No one should base any conclusions on the wording in a news article.

The report speaks of a 'barrage of insults". In no state or US territory may dealy force be threatened in response to insults.

But if there was a basis for a reasonable belief that force was immediately necessary to defend the persons from... (at that point, differences among jurisdictional laws become important).
 
Kleanbore said:
No one should base any conclusions on the wording in a news article.

The report speaks of a 'barrage of insults". In no state or US territory may dealy force be threatened in response to insults.

But if there was a basis for a reasonable belief that force was immediately necessary to defend the persons from... (at that point, differences among jurisdictional laws become important).
Click to expand...
This is true as drawing a gun without cause could invite retaliation at a later date. But, on the flip side it did give the persecuted family momentary peace of mind.
 
BigBore44 said:
I can’t wait for a few particular moderators and legal “experts” to tell us all how this guy shouldn’t have done that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was wondering why some of the moderators seem to present legal conclusory opinions about some topics but they seldom / never provide a legal citation. If they are lawyers and want to bring a certain judicial decision or statute to the community's attention, that would be great. Otherwise, they just come off as petty tyrants / jailhouse lawyers spewing bilious you know what....

NOTE - This post has been brought up to clarify my comment on moderation. Also, it is to document why the later posts by this individual were disingenuous to say the least, as JohnKsa pointed out. GEM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you don't like our moderation, you have two choices:

1. Free Market of forums. That is esp. true if you are relatively new. Why be here? If a long time member has a beef, we take it seriously.
2. Report it to Staff - we have mechanisms for that. Personal insults are inappropriate.
 
GEM said:
If you don't like our moderation, you have two choices:

1. Free Market of forums. That is esp. true if you are relatively new. Why be here? If a long time member has a beef, we take it seriously.
2. Report it to Staff - we have mechanisms for that. Personal insults are inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Traversing a legal argument is very different from engaging in an ad hominem attack, seems to me. If someone presents a conclusory legal opinion -- even and maybe especially if it's a moderator -- and someone else asks for the legal citation that supports said conclusory legal opinion, that would seem to be a simple search for the truth or at least a search for valid information. I don't know why asking for a legal citation in support of said conclusory legal opinion would be considered a "personal insult," although I could see where it might be embarrassing if no supporting legal citation exists for the conclusory opinion.

GEM - please read the now undeleted post above to explain the issue of inappropriate language.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No one has asked for anything in the way of a relevant legal citation.

This is not a moderation issue, but the staff has summarized the gist of the relevant law and opinion.

[URL="https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/brandishing-and-when-can-i-draw.731200/"]"Brandishing", and "When Can I Draw"?[/URL]

Since this was last revised, a number of additional states have enacted provisions for the lawful defensive presentation of a firearm. But as Attorney Andrew Branca has pointed out, the question of whether such presentation will be deemed lawful will be determined in court, based on the evidence brought forth after the fact.

Anyone who want s to pursue this in greater depth should subscribe to the LawofSelfDefense, take the basic course, and subscribe to all of the state supplements.

That will cost money and require a lot of time, but there is no easy way.
 
I don't know why asking for a legal citation in support of said conclusory legal opinion would be considered a "personal insult,"...
Click to expand...
Of COURSE it wouldn't.

For future reference, staff can still see deleted posts, so your disingenous pretense that it was benign is futile.

If you are honestly confused about what specific part of the post you wrote (now deleted) qualifies as a "personal insult", PM me. I will refresh your memory.
 
Kleanbore said:
No one should base any conclusions on the wording in a news article.

The report speaks of a 'barrage of insults". In no state or US territory may dealy force be threatened in response to insults.

But if there was a basis for a reasonable belief that force was immediately necessary to defend the persons from... (at that point, differences among jurisdictional laws become important).
Click to expand...
After reading the article, I wonder whether there is case law as to where the line is drawn between "insults" and "threats". The BGs specifically threatened to rape the wife. Rape is certainly a violent assault and the BGs being male presumably had the means to carry out their threat... and throwing garbage on the family clearly indicated that they were not limiting themselves to words... ???
 
Deadly force laws are not a "recipe" for how to cook up a legal shooting. Deadly force laws are there as a safety net. Looking at them as a laundry list where once all the proper items are checked off, one can open fire creates confusion because that philosophy is not consistent with the general principle of deadly force laws.

Imagine being in an airplane that is taking off. You have been provided a parachute for use in case it becomes obvious that a crash is imminent. The flight crew provides a briefing explaining when it would be appropriate to jump out of the aircraft and how to use your parachute.

Do you keep pestering them throughout the flight? Can I jump out of the plane now? What about now? We had some turbulence, can I use my parachute now? The pilot looks a little peaked, can I jump now? I heard that guy across the aisle use the word "crash"--now can I jump? You said if our engines went out, we should jump--I think that one sounds funny, so can I jump?

Of course not. That's not the point of having a parachute. It's a contingency to be used only in extremis.

A defender does what is absolutely necessary to prevent serious injury or death and then trusts the deadly force laws to prevent the justice system from applying punishment for committing an act that would normally be a heinous crime.

The same general principle applies to the use of force that is not deadly force.

Displaying (but not pointing) a gun in my state is considered to be a use of force but not a use of deadly force. If I displayed my self-defense handgun without the proper justification, it would be a crime. In other words, I would only do that if I felt there were no other good options available to deal with the situation. If things escalated, I might also shoot if I felt there were no other good options for preventing serious injury or death. Then I would hope that the legal system saw the situation the same way I did when I made my decision.
 
If your post was intended as a reply to mine, you misconstrued what I wrote.

The question was raised earlier whether it was legal for the armed citizen to display his firearm in defense of the visiting family. It was then stated that "insults" are not actions that justify deadly force. Not that my personal opinion matters, but I agree with that and agree that that is appropriate law. But it seems to me that "I'm gonna rape your wife" is not the same kind of statement as "Hey monkey-face, go back where you came from so I don't have to look at your stupid skullcap." So while I would be very surprised to find this nuance discussed in a statute, it seemed possible that there might be some case law distinguishing between an "insult" vs a "threat". My question arose out of the specific facts reported about this incident, but if you prefer a different example, Mr 6'3" 255 lbs with the BJJ logo mentioned elsewhere says "I'm gonna tear you limb from limb", is that only an "insult" or is it a "threat"? Similar to the rape-threatener, he is certainly capable of carrying it out.

I don't believe trying to understand nuances of the law is equivalent to looking for excuses to behave one way or another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
BURMA-STYLE SIGN SLOGANS/ GUNS SAVE LIVES
Replies
15
Views
3K
Horsesense
H
S
  • Locked
Weapons and Self Defense in Jewish Law
Replies
5
Views
1K
Chaz
C
T
  • Locked
Good Samaritan Gun Use
Replies
1
Views
511
Lennyjoe
Lennyjoe
hso
  • Locked
Op Ed in Newsweek by John Lott
Replies
12
Views
892
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
K
  • Locked
Gun Banner Wishes My Family to Be Murdered and Die Slowly
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
Vitamin G
V
Back
Top