Not your gunfight, but you get involved anyway

From the video, it seems the drunken Young offered them a beer before any shots were fired at deputies.
That was obviously the time for deescalating language and seeking to get people to chill. Nobody (thankfully) had been struck at that point. Heck, it was certainly not the time to yell at a drunk guy about combat and killing.

So did they forfeit their right to pull the deputies out of the line of fire because they were part of the altercation? Even if their actions contributed to the confrontation it doesn't change the fact that they pulled the downed deputies out of the line of fire. We're talking about two parts of the same incident.
 
old lady new shooter writes:

In the Arizona case I mentioned, the police officer was on the ground, the BG was on top of him beating him mercilessly and trying to take his sidearm. That doesn't sound like relatives disputing an inheritance.

Burn! (sorry, had to. I'm a 70s-80s kid) :D
 
My predetermined policy is VERY comfortable and easy for me.
There are perhaps 10-12 people in my life for whom I would be "all in" instantaneously.

Meanwhile…I have neighbors whom I have known for twenty years or more.
Entire depth of our relationship in one sentence: "Good Morning, Sue. Good Morning, Greg. Nice weather!"

There is no way I am immersing myself in a gun battle over Sue and Greg. That is for them.
Same policy goes for everyone else, regardless of uniform they might or might not be wearing.

Most any high-profile shooting would lead to months (if not years) wrapped-up in the court system.
My employer would undoubtedly grow weary of the distraction, even if a clean shoot, and terminate me.

So…if I hear a loud commotion and look outside the window and see that it does not involve the aforementioned very near and dear 10-12 people? In that case my engagement is calling 9-1-1 and snapping pictures or video of what I observe.
 
My predetermined policy is VERY comfortable and easy for me.
There are perhaps 10-12 people in my life for whom I would be "all in" instantaneously.

Meanwhile…I have neighbors whom I have known for twenty years or more.
Entire depth of our relationship in one sentence: "Good Morning, Sue. Good Morning, Greg. Nice weather!"

There is no way I am immersing myself in a gun battle over Sue and Greg. That is for them.
Same policy goes for everyone else, regardless of uniform they might or might not be wearing.

Most any high-profile shooting would lead to months (if not years) wrapped-up in the court system.
My employer would undoubtedly grow weary of the distraction, even if a clean shoot, and terminate me.

So…if I hear a loud commotion and look outside the window and see that it does not involve the aforementioned very near and dear 10-12 people? In that case my engagement is calling 9-1-1 and snapping pictures or video of what I observe.

I'm going to try to keep the spirit of THR's basic concepts in place and I certainly don't mean to insult you in any way...

I'm glad you aren't my neighbor.
 
"…I'm going to try to keep the spirit of THR's basic concepts in place and I certainly don't mean to insult you in any way...I'm glad you aren't my neighbor…"
No offense taken at all, THR Friend! :thumbup:
We all have countless acquaintances and casual relationships via schools, work, clubs, and organizations.

This is why I chuckle when someone with 5000 Facebook friends cannot get help to move his/her apartment.
The way this connects to Strategies, Tactics, and Training is we cannot be selfless with everyone out there.
 
Truely awesome response that helps me to understand and appreciate your stance.

And you are correct in that being proactive can be less than bennificial. One of my sons and I were traveling home through the city north of us, saw a young man beaten and bloody, and stopped to provide him initial 1st aid and call the police...8 hours of our lives were then wasted dealing with the aftermath. That was city...my rural environment is a whole different ballgame and we have and will continue to look after our neighbors when the poop hits the fan.

Props to you my friend, as I'm sure you would step to it if pressed.
 
So…if I hear a loud commotion and look outside the window and see that it does not involve the aforementioned very near and dear 10-12 people? In that case my engagement is calling 9-1-1 and snapping pictures or video of what I observe
If you hear a loud commotion and look out the window and choose to involve yourself, what evidence would you provide to support a reasonable belief that the persons were lawfully entitled to use force in their own defense?
 
"…Props to you my friend, as I'm sure you would step to it if pressed…"
Good on you and your son graciously assisting that unfortunate injured man.
You are correct in that I view "both sides of the coin" when volunteering assistance out in the world.

Helping complete strangers without fanfare is rewarding when it is simply extending effort and some sweat.
Entering into a gunfight has the highest stakes. Paradoxically that stranger may not even recall your name in the future. That is why I have already decided (in advance) me remaining alive for my family is the decider.

Thank you for kindly comparing and contrasting various points. It helps us all with how we carry ourselves.
 
"…and look out the window and choose to involve yourself, what evidence would you provide to support a reasonable belief that the persons were lawfully entitled to use force in their own defense?…"
Those aforementioned 10-12 near and dear inner circle folks?
My rapid response decision would be made because we have mutually devoted ourselves to each other for decades. I am confident none of those people would knowingly/intentionally hurt or betray me.
 
My rapid response decision would be made because we have mutually devoted ourselves to each other for decades. I am confident none of those people would knowingly/intentionally hurt or betray me.
That does not tell you what preceded the incident.

"Good guys" with excellent reputations and clean records have unwittingly ended up in situations in which they did not meet all of the requirements of lawful self defense.
 
"…That does not tell you what preceded the incident. 'Good guys' with excellent reputations and clean records have unwittingly ended up in situations in which they did not meet all of the requirements of lawful self defense…"
Agreed. I am willing to roll those particular dice.

I have no reason to believe my parents, siblings, cousins, or dear lifelong friends would make catastrophic errors in judgement and simultaneously need my help. For that tiny group, it is Strategies, Tactics, and Training risk that I am willing to take.
 
Based on the limited info that is provided in the OP, I would say they definitely did the right thing. I would highly recommend not getting involved in any law enforcement uses of force unless requested to assist, however in this instance it seems that the deputies were disabled and in imminent danger of losing their lives. Under those circumstances I would only hope that there were some capable armed citizens nearby to help me out if I was that deputy.

Under any other circumstances I would absolutely discourage getting involved unless requested to do so due to the high likelihood of being perceived as an additional threat.
 
Am new to THR and catching up reading the many informative, thoughtful topics and posts. This subject hits close to home as there are four generations of LEOs in my family and I have many more as good friends,

We all have our "Go" buttons whether they're set for "Me and Mine" or "Unknown Damsel in Distress." Mine is set for "Officer Needs Assistance." To be sure, I am not a LEO, I do not carry a Jr. Detective badge, and I'm no Walter Mitty. But having thought through this scenario many, many times, if it appears an officer needs help, I know exactly what phrasing/modulation I'll use to ask. If he/she says "yes," I'm there. If he/she is disabled and cannot answer, I'm there. I will not attempt to engage in conversation a BG who is physically attacking a LEO, as the situation at that point is way beyond the de-escalation stage. As for other LEOs who may be arriving on-scene, the sooner they get there the better. But that's also why I practice/practice/practice one-handed re-holstering.

YMMV.

Stay safe, everyone.
 
Welcome to THR forums, @Private Citizen .
That is good that you have contemplated your proverbial "line in the sand" in advance.
I have similarly thought about this and believe it will speed decisions, heaven forbid.
 
A question. If I were to happen upon an officer requesting assistance from me would that request carry any weight concerning charges or liability related issues that I might face after the fact?
 
A question. If I were to happen upon an officer requesting assistance from me would that request carry any weight concerning charges or liability related issues that I might face after the fact?

I would imagine each case will be different, depending on the specific circumstances of the incident, the jurisdiction where it happened, and any pertinent case law, but I remembered this section in the MS code from some background reading. I cannot imagine that would be the only state with similar wording but I have no idea whether that would be correct or not.

"As used in subsection (1)(c) and (d) of this section, the term "when necessarily committed" means that a public officer or a person acting by or at the officer's command, aid or assistance is authorized to use such force as necessary in securing and detaining the felon offender, overcoming the offender's resistance, preventing the offender's escape, recapturing the offender if the offender escapes or in protecting himself or others from bodily harm; but such officer or person shall not be authorized to resort to deadly or dangerous means when to do so would be unreasonable under the circumstances. The public officer or person acting by or at the officer's command may act upon a reasonable apprehension of the surrounding circumstances; however, such officer or person shall not use excessive force or force that is greater than reasonably necessary in securing and detaining the offender, overcoming the offender's resistance, preventing the offender's escape, recapturing the offender if the offender escapes or in protecting himself or others from bodily harm."

https://law.justia.com/codes/mississippi/2020/title-97/chapter-3/section-97-3-15/
 
A question. If I were to happen upon an officer requesting assistance from me would that request carry any weight concerning charges or liability related issues that I might face after the fact?
It depends on the state. In Illinois you are covered the same as a peace officer if an officer requests your assistance. That is specially spelled out in the law. In fact, you can be charged if you refuse to assist an officer who requests your assistance. I am only aware of one person ever being prosecuted under that law though. There is a thread either here or in legal that covers that incident.
 
It depends on the state. In Illinois you are covered the same as a peace officer if an officer requests your assistance. That is specially spelled out in the law. In fact, you can be charged if you refuse to assist an officer who requests your assistance. I am only aware of one person ever being prosecuted under that law though. There is a thread either here or in legal that covers that incident.

What if the officer was acting illegally at the time of making the request? Would a person be protected under the law (in the states that protect citizens helping officers) if the officer was engaged in an illegal activity?
 
What if the officer was acting illegally at the time of making the request? Would a person be protected under the law (in the states that protect citizens helping officers) if the officer was engaged in an illegal activity?

This is what the law says:
https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/il...ChapterID=54&SeqStart=9400000&SeqEnd=11100000
(725 ILCS 5/107-8) (from Ch. 38, par. 107-8)
Sec. 107-8. Assisting peace officer). (a) A peace officer making a lawful arrest may command the aid of persons over the age of 18.
(b) A person commanded to aid a peace officer shall have the same authority to arrest as that peace officer.
(c) A person commanded to aid a peace officer shall not be civilly liable for any reasonable conduct in aid of the officer.
(Source: P.A. 80-360.)


https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/il...&ChapterID=53&SeqStart=8300000&SeqEnd=9900000
(720 ILCS 5/7-6) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-6)
Sec. 7-6. Private person's use of force in making arrest.
(a) A private person who makes, or assists another private person in making a lawful arrest is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if he were summoned or directed by a peace officer to make such arrest, except that he is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm only when he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another.
(b) A private person who is summoned or directed by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest which is unlawful, is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if the arrest were lawful, unless he knows that the arrest is unlawful.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 1983.)


Basically you have to know the action is unlawful to be liable. If a peace officer commands you to assist him, the state be responsible to defend him in any civil action resulting from that assistance just the same as if the person was a sworn officer. This is how it is in Illinois I can't speak for other states.
 
What if the officer was acting illegally at the time of making the request? Would a person be protected under the law (in the states that protect citizens helping officers) if the officer was engaged in an illegal activity?

Interesting...

Basically you have to know the action is unlawful to be liable.

Imagine that - one can potentially get screwed over by Law Enforcement.

And a good many of use probably don't even know all of the regulations in the basic DMV handbook by heart.
 
Two neighbors retrieved their own firearms to go to the aid of two deputies who'd just taken shotgun wounds to the head (both in danger of losing their eyesight). Shot at the suspect to (apparently) allow other neighbors to drag the injured deputies to safety into a nearby garage until additional responders arrived.

Any thoughts? This one seems to have worked out well. The deputies were well-known in the neighborhood, and one of the two residents that came to their aid apparently had some combat experience (military).

https://www.king5.com/article/news/...ight/281-0d77006e-7574-435d-98d1-3ed3d8189236

This retiree [ LEO ] sees this as a perfect use of a friendly fire incident

If ever I needed a hand and a lifesaver,I would pray that I had an angel like these deputys did.

Goodonyamates !!
 
Two neighbors retrieved their own firearms to go to the aid of two deputies who'd just taken shotgun wounds to the head (both in danger of losing their eyesight). Shot at the suspect to (apparently) allow other neighbors to drag the injured deputies to safety into a nearby garage until additional responders arrived.

Any thoughts? ...
BRAVO! :D Well done!

My instincts (hopefully they are not too long-unused/-unneeded) would almost certainly have had me in the middle of such an obvious Good vs Bad scenario before I had what I would normally think a decent amount of time to properly consider the potential consequences. I would also hope that my tachipsychia would still quickly kick in as it has during a number of important episodes in my life. ;)
 
My basic instinct, when I see trouble, is to jump in and try to help. After reading the MANY comments on this thread, I can see that getting involved in other peoples' problems is a very bad idea. But it's my instinct to do it. When I see somebody stuck in the mud, or broke down on a dirt road out in the boondocks, I stop and help. I've been in the military and saw situations where a very bad thing was happening, but lives were saved because some ordinary guy, not the specialist whose particular job it is to deal with such problems, jumped in and did something that saved somebody's life or kept a disaster from getting worse. I've been a volunteer firefighter for many years and have been involved in some ugly stuff. Some situations were so bad that having the help of bystanders made things turn out ok, otherwise somebody would have died or suffered much more. Should I have given the drowned guy at the swimming pool CPR? I'm no EMT, and it's not my job to get involved in things like that. Should I have helped to keep the guy who was trapped in the smashed up car alive while the fire dept cut him out of there with the jaws of life? Should the guys who jumped up on the crashed airplane on the flight deck and pulled the unconscious pilot out before the plane blew up have done that? They saved the pilot's life, but they sure took a big risk doing it. They probably should have just taken cover before the plane blew up. If I saw a police officer getting attacked my instinct would be to help him. If I saw a woman getting beat up or raped, I doubt if I would run away or just stand there and watch. I just hope I'm never in such a situation.
 
Back
Top