A Judge with a gun trumps a crutch every time

[Nushif]

Change the scenario a little. Lets say a man in his 50's(thinkin most Judges are not much younger) is sitting a a recruitment table for the NRA in front of a grocery store. Another man, no certain age, walks up to him and attacks him with a wooden club.

That is a pretty darned crucial change. And one that changes the entire game.

The judge wasn't "just sitting at a recruitment booth."
He was sitting at a pulpit, passing judgement on a criminal under guard by a police officer.
He wasn't attacked with a wooden club. He was attacked with an item the BG needed to walk with.

I guess it's also ok, that a police line during riots opens up with their 12 gauges when some random protester runs up and throws a small rock? No! It's not! The Police is there, with the distinct expectation to have rocks thrown at them.
Any judge who thinks that every last defendant is going to take a sentence sitting down and demure is deluding themselves.
You know that line about "rugged men willing to do violence" on someone else's behalf? Yeah, they're rugged because the point is that they can take a hit or two with a crutch. And in a way, a Judge falls under that, too.
There is a risk in being a judge. And when one signs up to be a judge one has to be willing to take that risk.

I will stand by what I said earlier and continue to reiterate. A threat where I have a good chance of escaping with a few bruises is *not* worth drawing my gun over.
Carrying a gun is not in and of itself justification of deadly force. A license to carry is not a license to use.

And how anyone claim to be in a "Warrior's mindset" while being afraid to take a couple of bruises to end a confrontation is beyond me.

Not *every* last physical altercation calls for a gun.

There is probably (and I don't know the statistics) a higher chance fo dying when you're driving on an on-ramp than when you get into a small match of fisticuffs at a bar. And I don't see people shooting each other very often for getting close on an on-ramp.

 

[benzy2]

It all comes down to the situation at hand. Take the judge to be a 70 year old man and the guy with crutches to be a juice head with a slightly sprained ankle. Here you could see how a shooting would be justifiable. Now, on the other hand, if the judge is mid 40s and the guy on crutches is a 100lb soaking wet wimp that can hardly move the crutch, it certainly wouldn't have been justified. This instance could have fallen anywhere in between the spectrum. Maybe the judge was justified, maybe not. Just because someone hits me with a crutch sure doesn't mean I'm pulling my firearm and shooting. There is a lot more to it that that. I may shoot and I may keep the gun holstered. It really depends on the situation at hand. To say you would shoot anyone that hit you with a crutch is senseless and irresponsible. Would you shoot a 90 year old lady who can't move the crutch 3mph? I sure as hell hope not. It all comes down to the given situation.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

It really depends on the situation at hand.

Yes and nobody on this forum knows the exact circumstances nor does anyone else who was not in that courtroom. I would also point out that the Bailiff,charged with the security of the courtroom,NOT the judge shot the attacker.

 

[788Ham]

Nushif,

Why all of the off-center fill-in comments, all of the "what ifism's"? Did you bother to read all that was stated? Maybe you ought to go back and reread the story, only this time, read the black print and forget about the white paper its written on! Forget about trying to sway the story into your way of thinking, we see enough of this in the daily papers!

 

[ForumSurfer]

Forget about trying to sway the story into your way of thinking

He isn't. We don't know the entire story. More facts are needed to know if the judge had a reason to believe his life was in danger. I for one, am on the fence about this as well. The judge in this case will likely go unchecked. Remove the judge and insert me, and the prosecution would be wanting to know why I felt my life was in danger or I'd be facing charges.

I see the self defense side of the argument, but I also see much potential for this to be a case of a judge getting by with something that we common folk would have to answer for. T

 

[Nushif]

I see the self defense side of the argument, but I also see much potential for this to be a case of a judge getting by with something that we common folk would have to answer for.

Yup.

 

[NMGonzo]

Suicide by cop?

 

[makarovnik]

Not appropriate to try to hit a judge. It's also not appropriate to draw a weapon on a man only armed with a crutch. Now when you try to take away gun from judge you are really asking for it.

I can't help but wonder though; If I had a confrontation with a man on the street who was armed only with a crutch and he ended up getting shot; would I serve time? Probably. Would the gun vs. crutch thing be considered excessive force? Probably.

Anyway, behave yourself in court even though some judges deserve a whack upside the head.

 

[Cop Bob]

To Sum it Up....

Stupid Hurts.............

Attack a Judge.. DUMB
With a Weapon (Crutch-Club) ...... DUMBER
In the presence of a Police Officer............ Terminally STUPID:banghead:

He paid for it.... Oh Well

In the words of the great philosopher Forrest Gump... Stupid Is As Stupid Does.. and that's about all I have to say about that...

 

[Mr Woody]

"I feel kinda bad about this whole deal. If we assume one of two parties in a fist fight drawing a gun means that the level of force is instantly raised then we're penalizing the lesser armed party.

"Or, to make it more clear:
you get into a barfight and some punches are thrown ... suddenly the other guy draws a gun on you, even though all your intent to do was to knock him on his "derriere" the situation suddenly turns into him deciding to shoot you with no repercussions because he had a gun."



Umm, Yes the fight has now changed to a dealy confrontation.

If I am setting at a counter and someone comes up and starts swinging its a fist fight. If I feel I am about to suffer real harm from this attack the law permitts me to use deadly force. If on the other hand I get up and slug the other guy and he starts thinking he might loose and pulls a gun: He is not in a self defence position. He is still the agressor and will likely go to jail. There is a difference as to who is at fault in the altercation.

 

[HB]

Where was the bailiff? I can't really imagine shooting anybody on crutches for something like this either... the cop was of course fine because somebody was about to get shot if the judge lost the gun

 

[Oyeboten]

Was the Judge a woman? And an excessively obese one, who had trouble moving away from the guy trying to use his Crutch to hit her?


Seems to me, a guy ON Crutches, is not likely to be all that agile, if he electes to use one of his Crutches to 'attack' someone.


Jus' musing on the thing is all.

Far as I can tell, I would have just pushed the Crutch aside and move into the guy, and away, or just got out of his way and out of reach, and let the Bailiff handle it.


But, I was not there to see what the deal was, so...


Just does not sound good anyway, far as what we have to go on.

 

[Cemo]

IMO an attack on me, whether it be fists, crutches, or baseball bat, would put me in fear of my life and I would stop his attack with my weapon. You don't know the mind set of the person attacking you, you don't know where he would stop. Would he leave you dead, disabled? The judge should have shot him.

 

[Oyeboten]

Too bad we do not have a good Video of the event.


As it is, the little we do have for info, seems to leave out everything useful for extracting anything useful.


Man on crutches, 94 years old? 5' 2", pipe cleaner arms, liver spots and cellophane skin and so on, weighs 87 pounds...Judge, recent early retire, perfect health, 40 yo ex pro wretler, bicepts bigger than the old guy's waist? weight Lifts every day, jogs ten miles each way to work?

We don't know...



I have had several 'crazy' or empotionally unstable people come at me through the years, with weapons or objects...never had to harm anyone yet.


Either move into them, or, move away from them.


Seems easy enough to me.

 

[Mr Woody]

A bit more information here.

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/goodwater-alabama-courthouse-shooting-2754114.html

 

[Zoogster]

Hard to say.


I certainly understand the perspectives of those here saying it may have been excessive force, it could have been unnecessary.

It also could have been proper force, it is certainly a more discretionary case and you can bet the law is going to side with a judge.
In that respect yes, they do get more benefit of the doubt that a mere commoner might.



But assuming a man on crutches is not a physical threat because of his perceived condition is a big assumption.
Just as someone in a cast can be extra dangerous even with a broken limb.
I remember a kid with a cast on their arm was one of the most armed individuals on a playground. Someone messing with them was liable to get clubbed with a rock hard club worse than any punch.


Many crutches are pretty lightly made and poor striking weapons, but it is certainly possible one could be a lethal weapon or someone find a good striking surface.

I have known people in wheelchairs that are much stronger than your average person because they use their arms as their primary transportation and they are as strong as many legs. So its even possible someone would need lethal force to escape the damage or clutches of someone that uses a wheel chair.



Someone's perceived physical condition based on their use of some sort of mechanical assistance is not properly indicative of how much of a threat they are.
Just as saying lethal force is appropriate because they have such an item is a judgment we cannot make, there is certainly people who shouldn't be shot, and it would be a shame to think anyone already at a physical disadvantage with a means of mechanical assistance would justify use of force against them in an altercation. Many people may need to immediately use a cane, crutch, or other object against a much stronger thug or person they have an argument with that tries to attack them.
They may already be at such a physical disadvantage or at risk of easily re-injuring serious existing injuries (like say spinal or other serious injuries that place them at immediate risk of death or serious injury just from a minor scuffle.) Their use of a weapon against even an unarmed attacker may always be a proper response because of such a disparity of force.
To think that others may use that to justify shooting them certainly is not a desired regularly event or outcome in society.



This is a situation that would result in extreme jury discretion if the shooter was a regular person or defending a regular person. They could be guilty of excessive force, or considered justified, and irregardless of the other circumstances there is a big chance it could go either way.
However since it was a judge, you can bet no charges will likely be filed, and if they were they would almost certainly not pass a grand jury. If they ever made it to court a judge would bias all evidence towards defending the actions or need to defend another judge in his courtroom.
In that respect yes, there is absolutely bias for a judge, a judge is the representative of the law, and the law is not going to turn against them if there is any discretion in the decision.