Argument with victim's Brother

[USAF_Vet]

I agree that the OP should just drop the subject. I would like to hear more of the details surrounding the incident itself, but I don't see that happening.

We can all sit around and play armchair general about the facts, but we just don't have enough of them to make any valid arguments. There is too much grey area here to be definitive.

 

[Bozwell]

Noir, I agree with you to the extent that the shooter has some responsibility here, but I also think you can't make the statement that none of this is the mugger's fault. Blame does not have to be accessed in a binary fashion - it's all shades of gray. The shooter is responsibility for every bullet he fires - that's basic firearm safety. If he had closed his eyes and recklessly fired with a preschool class standing behind the mugger, would the shooter be completely blameless? Of course not. He's still responsible for every bullet he fires.

On the other hand, I don't think you can argue that the mugger is absolved of blame in this situation either. But for the mugger's illegal actions, the shooter wouldn't have needed to discharge his weapon. No, the mugger isn't the actual cause of the victim's injuries, but he's certainly a proximate cause.

At the end of the day, both people are at fault, but that's not going to matter to the brother of the victim here. You aren't going to convince the guy of your point, regardless of the merits, because this isn't a scholarly debate to him. This is his brother minding his own business and then getting paralyzed from a stray bullet. Save the debate for forums like this, save your prayers for the victim and his family.

 

[mgmorden]

His brother shouldn't have been involved in mugging someone. Price ya gotta pay for being a criminal.

As has already been pointed out, the guy's brother wasn't the mugger. The person being mugged shot at the mugger, MISSED, and hit his brother who was a bystander.

All in all though, I agree with the others that say that you're not going to be able to reason with this guy. Once you become emotionally vested into a particular issue you're no longer going to be able to logically and reasonably evaluate the issue. It's the same reason why victims families don't get to be on a jury. Despite their pain and need for justice, their emotional investment won't allow them to pass a fair and balanced judgement on the issue.

 

[bigfatdave]

Kinda makes me wonder more about the situation. Was lethal force necessary?

mugging is armed robbery, so YES.

I would want to know that the shooter had no other choice but to fire.

someone threatened their life for the contents of their wallet/pocket ... there is no way that they were obligated to trust in the altruism of their attacker and meekly hand over their property in the hopes they wouldn't be executed or injured.

 

[bigfatdave]

This is NOT the mugger's fault.

WRONG!
The person initiating the violent felony caused all subsequent actions.
The defender/victim wouldn't have been randomly slinging lead about if they weren't faced with being the victims of a violent felony and threat to their life.

And, no, I don't think randomly slinging lead is a good plan if mugged, but the odd thing about muggers is that they really dislike armed resistance and make themselves difficult targets to hit ... which is great if they're exiting the area at high speed, not so much if they're still presenting a threat to their victim.

 

[rondog]

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought the injured party was WITH the mugger and got hit instead. He was just some poor guy in the background? That sucks.

 

[george29]

Most people don't believe how hard a hit is to achieve in real circumstances.

Why did I get attacked? All I meant was don't shoot unless you are certain where that bullet is going to hit or there are absolutely no other choice but to shoot. I thought tha was just common sense. Are you calmer now mr Potvin? Perhaps you should keep your trigger-fingers off the keyboard when under emotional duress. Have a Margarita on me bud, life sucks sometimes and all you can do is suck with it.
BTW, there isn't enough info to know if clearing-leather was warranted or whether the shooter intended on shooting (almost sounds like someone cleared leather with their finger inside the trigger guard). On the face of things, the law many times blames the assailant and not the defender so I don't think people here were being cavalier, they were being politically-incorrect and insensitive but they were making a macro point and you are making a minor point and both are right.

 

[DAP90]

Why did I get attacked?

I would not call that an attack. I was responding to a perceived difference of opinion.

All I meant was don't shoot unless you are certain where that bullet is going to hit or there are absolutely no other choice but to shoot.

This is exactly what I want others to remember. Exactly that! When I read your post what I got from it was the exact opposite. It’s hard to hit, therefore, when you miss and a bystander takes a bullet you shouldn’t be surprised. No indication that this was a bad thing; just don’t be surprised.

Did I read to much into it? Sure, but I'm not the first person to misinterperate posts on the internet.

Believe me George29, I have nothing against you and wouldn’t attack you. If I felt we couldn’t have a civilized discussion I simply wouldn’t respond.

Now, where can I pick up that margarita you offered?

 

[george29]

In NM. IM me when you're here.

 

[Brock Landers]

Sure it's the muggers fault for starting the situation, but the blame for this man's injury rests squarely with the shooter. You can't go firing off rounds with no idea of what they might hit. Someone who carries should know better than that.

If I were the victim, a family member, friend, etc., I would expect both the mugger and the shooter to end up in jail for this.

 

[303tom]

I think you all are F.O.S. a bystander in a mugging , probably why the accident happened too him (for not helping) . Never knew muggers like to have bystanders watching , unless they were involved .

 

[NavyLCDR]

If I were the victim, a family member, friend, etc., I would expect both the mugger and the shooter to end up in jail for this.

So, mugger comes at you wielding a knife and you shoot to possibly save your own life and you accidentally hit a bystander who maybe is out of sight on the other side of bushes. Would you feel the same way, that you should go to jail?

This whole thread is making me want to vomit.

 

[Mike1234567]

So, mugger comes at you wielding a knife and you shoot to possibly save your own life and you accidentally hit a bystander who maybe is out of sight on the other side of bushes. Would you feel the same way, that you should go to jail?

This whole thread is making me want to vomit.

Now, now, NavyLCDR. Please remove your "logical" helmet and promptly replace it with the emotional "guy with the gun is guilty" helmet.

 

[bigfatdave]

Now, now, NavyLCDR. Please remove your "logical" helmet and promptly replace it with the emotional "guy with the gun is guilty" helmet.

oh, that will solve everything!
PUT THE KNIFE AND GUN IN JAIL!
Problem solved, those weapons won;t be able to make those people do nasty things any more!

 

[GEM]

So Navy - want to play what if's. A killer is looking for you. He corners you and pulls a gun. You pull yours. However, he is standing in front of a school bus full of kids. However, so if you shoot , you may hit a kid. Of course, you are such a great shot, you would not miss.

Yeah, right. But wouldn't a moral person sacrifice himself rather than risk a kid? It makes me vomit to think that someone could be so narcissistic as not to be concerned about hurting an innocent to save their own skin.

Let's be real, if you shoot and ignore a reasonable risk to others, you are to blame - independent of the crook having started it. You value yourself more than the other. Thus it is self interest couching it in moral terms that you aren't responsible is just sophistry.

 

[Mike1234567]

Guys... NavyLCDR is DEFENDING the right of the guy to defend himself.

 

[withdrawn34]

So Navy - want to play what if's. An killer is looking for you. He corners you and pulls a gun. You pull yours. However, he is standing in front of a school bus full of kids. However, so if you shoot , you may hit a kid. Of course, you are such a great shot, you would not miss.

Yeah, right. But wouldn't a moral person sacrifice himself rather than risk a kid? It makes me vomit to think that someone could be so narcissistic as not to be concerned about hurting an innocent to save their own skin.

You aren't attacking Navy's hypothetical here. Strawman argument.

Let's be real, if you shoot and ignore a reasonable risk to others,

If someone is "on the other side of the bushes" and reasonably, you could not have known, how is that even close to analogous to a situation where you have a bright yellow bus full of kids that you definitely see?

They are clearly different scenarios. You cannot equate them and remain intellectually honest.

 

[bigfatdave]

Yeah, right. But wouldn't a moral person sacrifice himself rather than risk a kid?

That's a laughable strawman argument, but just for fun I'll pick it apart.
1 - there's no guarantee you'll hit anything in particular with a missed shot
2 - the initiator of the gunfight is responsible for any consequences
3 - we don't have a duty to make sure we know the exact position of every person within effective range of our defensive tols
4 - wouldn't you feel like an idiot after getting mugged, raped, tortured and murdered if that bus you sacrificed yourself for turned out to be empty?

 

[Mike1234567]

I wouldn't shoot in any direction I "see" other people, let alone a school bus. I'd drop lower and fire the gun upwardly.

 

[jsimmons]

this is a case of a certified self defense shooting gone awry. Rule #4 was violated, know what is behind your intended target.

Although, I can only blame the shooter/ mugging victim if and only if lethal force was not required. Innocent bystanders get shot, and that sucks. But I guess the brother would have rather seen a complete stranger get killed than see his brother injured. No sarcasm there, because if it were me, I'd rather someone I didn't know get mugged and possibly killed than see my brother injured.

Ultimaetly though, the blame does lie with the criminla who instigated the entire situation.

Here in Texas, if you shoot and hit someone other than your attacker in a situation like this, you will be taken to jail, and tried in court, and you can also be held liable in civil court.

 

[blindjim]

...and it's gonna get worse before it gets better.

There's no easy answer for moral and social decay. It's epidemic. And we face the mirror of blame.

These people... children... are our own kids... or were at some point.

We are to blame. We carry that burden of not being there. Having both husband and wife forced to work to eek out a living. We just weren't there... or didn't tender sufficiently those values we must have rooted in ourselves for a nuturing caring culture to move forward positively and with character.

TIVOs, Game Boys, X Boxes, Play Stations, and MTV became the teachers.

Respect is neither a favorite game, or a show. It's not taught through those media. Caring. consideration. Thoughtffulness and responsiblity aren't being conveyed in HALO, Mafia Wars, or from first person shoote games. only a devaluation and atrophying condition of 'you first after me!' prevails. Kill 'em all, and the sooner the better.

now we are face to face with damage control measures. Now we fill our hands so we can protect our own selves, our property, and our privacies thru leathality.

many only feel comfortable if they are carrying weapons! Just waht does that say about the society we live in day to day?

Or the individual who makes such a choice?

I'm old enough to remember well, those times of sleeping with doors unlocked. Strolls about the neighborhoods long after dark without any notion of dred.

If we... myself... and you... are not the reasons for why our world is as it is today... then who is to blame?

More importantly however... and for the benefit of us all, what now do we do?

Arm everyone? Freely? Openly? Quickly? With fully Auto gear?

that answer just doesn't seem like a feel good solution. One which lays deep inside peacefully.... and which good remedies probably ought to.

We're taking on water and alll we can do is bail... we've no time to fix the hole in the boat anymore.... or we simplly cant fully understand waht keeps making holes in the boat? Now that is really..... too bad.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I've got the answer. Sell your guns. Don't even go target shooting because every time you pull the trigger, there is a possibility, however slight, that some innocent might get shot by accident. We should all just carry cap guns and hope the noise drives off our attacker. I mean after all, for all we know, the bullet fired passed clean through the mugger and still hit the innocent bystander in the arm.

Now I'm not saying the shooter in this instance shouldn't be held liable. But in no way do I feel he should be held to the same standard of punishment as the mugger.

 

[Art Eatman]

Time for a break...