Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is there such a thing as premeditated Self-Defense

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by MagnumDweeb, Apr 18, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MagnumDweeb

    MagnumDweeb Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    Central Florida
    This has been an idea bothering me for sometime now. I'm only 23 but I wonder about a lot quasi-philosophical ideas. My main cause for wonder stems from a conversation a cousin and I had. I'm a Central Florida born and raised southern boy and he's a Yankee(a former yankee turned southernner) transplant living in Miami. He's a business owner and carries a few guns on him at any given time while at work (a Rossi snubby .38 on the ankle, a Rossi snubby .38 in a pocket, and his 629 or 1911 in an inside waist band holseter). He's only once ever had to shoot someone closing up late at night where a robber forced one of his employees to the back at gunpoint and he shot him in the side of the head with his .38 while he was otherwise distracted.

    But he also carries likewise when he's at 'home' which is a reputed less than safe part of town. He goes jogging in the evening and morning when he's at home (takes a Parahawg .45 and .38 snubby he tells me) and from what I've seen of the place those few times I've gone down to see him, it's not somwhere I would want to jog around at night. It also happens we are both fans of Charles Bronson (Magnificent Seven, Death Wish (all five movies, the third got a little hokey at the end), etc. etc.). I asked him flat out a couple of days ago during the AMC movie marathon if he thought he was being a Charles Bronson type. After some back-and-forth discussion it came down to self-defense and could it be premeditated. We both came to the conclusion it couldn't.

    We thought it couldn't because we as law abidding citizens are endowed with the God given right to be free from the assaults and molestations of those who would break the law to do us harm. Now granted I certainly think that's a correct philosophical and logical stance but when the law comes into play, what is logical is not always right. I'm not talking about vigilantism because the work of crime stopping should be left to the professionals otherwise things could get right dangerous. My biggest concern would be some liberal Yankee southern occupier (Yankee who moves south but keeps touting how great the north is, yet they stay in the south) DA holding me up in court as some kind of vigilantee looking to victimise murderers( I throw muggers in there who use weapons capable of killing people) and rapists while they were in the commission of their heinous acts. I know that sounds ludicrous but after reading CHG and the 'Beating Rambo Rap' and another bit about how you have to argue hollow points in order to avoid the insane and baseless accusations of the prosecutor, I think it is quite possible. Plus as a law school student (the good kind) I've found a number of cases out of New York City, California, Maryland, Michigan, and Illinois that are just plain absurd.

    I bascially feel that the incorrect and baseless interpretations of our lesser patriotic brethren makes our rights to the pursuit of life, liberty, and property, come at a premium or unjust restraint. What if I want to buy a cheap house in a high crime neighborhood and fix it up, what if I want to sit on my porch at night and videotape the dope dealers and send the tapes off to the cops and hope for some arrests and avoid embarrassing the cops by putting the tapes on youtube and sending them to the media? What if I want to be able to walk down the street with some pepper spray and one of my .44 Magnums and snubby .357s or .45 autos. Would I then be unjustly labeled a criminal when the dope dealer stepped onto my porch and threatened me with a knife or gun and as I genuinely feared for my life and I shot him? Would I then unjustly be labeled a criminal when some idiot with a gun trys to hold me up at gunpoint while I'm walking down the street and again genuinely fearing for my life I shoot him?

    I realize we, the patriots, are starting to make the subtle march back to liberty and the American spirit, but there are some questions I think we need to ask and work to discover otherwise we risk loosing the ground we've gained. Those antis we can't win over, we must at least walk quietly around and otherwise work to lawfully ostracise their otherwise treachorous ideas and conduct.

    And no not all northernners are yankees, my grandpa was an upstate New Yorker and plenty the country boy and patriot before he came south in the eighties. My roomate is a New Hampshire citizen and we find plenty in common with our beliefs of patriotizm and justice.
     
  2. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    I've heard that argument before too, I agree that there's no such thing.

    Is buying homeowners insurance premeditated arson if lightning hits your house? :)
     
  3. jwr_747

    jwr_747 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    313
    Location:
    north Al.
    if you "plan ahead" thats considered premeditated.if you CCW with the intent of defending yourself,it's a premediated act.if you are sitiuation aware,that is a premediated act.if you are attacked by a BG,throw your arms up to protect yourself,and by chance hit the BG in the nose,driving it into his brain,killing him,it is not premediated. jwr
     
  4. Sato Ord

    Sato Ord Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    Messages:
    657
    Location:
    Melbourne Florida
    I have actually heard this term before. I've heard a couple of antis spout it when what they were actually talking about was "Lying in Wait".

    Lying in Wait, or using things like guns set with trip wires is illegal in most places. It shows a degree of premeditation that president of law says is unacceptable. I, personally, am reserving judgment on this.

    However, the antis I've heard using this would like to lump all people who use a firearm for defense into one neat ball and then throw that ball out of their nice neat fluffy-bunny world: they will use terms like this to "prove" their point.

    In reality there is no such thing as premeditated self-defense. There is being prepared, and that is perfectly acceptable in my reality.
     
  5. cambeul41

    cambeul41 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,186
    Location:
    Southeast Michigan
    What do you mean by "premeditated"?

    The definition that comes to my mind is, "Characterized by deliberate purpose, previous consideration, and some degree of planning."

    By that definition, don't the majority of us here premeditate self-defense?
     
  6. bnkrazy

    bnkrazy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    382
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    According to Cooper's Color Code, once you're in condition orange or red, you're mindset should be "If that person does [life threatening action], I will do [defensive action].", for example, "If he comes any closer with that knife, I will shoot him."

    I'd say that is premeditated. I'd also say that it is the legal (in most states) and moral thing to do. No one has the right to take your life, and if they threaten it you have the right to stop the threat.
     
  7. Kind of Blued

    Kind of Blued Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,676
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Well, they way I see it "pre-meditated" implies, to a degree, that there is a 100% chance of "it" happening (whatever it may be).

    When someone decides to commit a murder and begins planning the murder, they are theoretically 100% in control of whether that murder occurs or not.

    "Pre-meditated self-defense" however, can't be proven to exist, as the act of self-defense hinges 100% on the actions and will of the attacker. The defendant is merely acknowledging that 100% of the attacker, doing some simple math, and finding that the number of violent crimes divided by the number of citizens is, in fact, more than zero. At this point, common sense says that you can play the odds, or take steps to insure that the odds don't play you.

    i.e. Self-defense is conditional, and it's existence is not up to the defendant. The outcome of an attack however, is.
     
  8. conw

    conw Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    3,364
    It's premeditated by definition, as other posters have said.

    Your debate really seems to be more about whether the same conditions apply to premeditated self-defense (vs non-premeditated self-defense if that's possible) as to premeditated crime (vs non-premeditated crime)...

    By definition, self-defense is not a crime. Therefore, premeditation doesn't make it a crime. If you "premeditate" to the point that it becomes a crime, it isn't self-defense, even if you claim it is.

    Like someone else said, "Lying in Wait" sounds more like what you're worried about: manipulating someone into a situation where they are provoked into allowing you to "defend" yourself...that, however, is not self-defense, and is premeditated.
     
  9. gym

    gym member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,903
    That is a tough one, because if you expand the thought, what if someone moves to a bad neighboorhood, so their odds go up as far as being involved in an altercation. Now if he lived their before he had a permit, it could be ruled as justified, but lets say a fairlly affluent person moves in to a ghetto, or violent neighborhood and he's a gun fanatic, like that kid from Homestead, only smarter with a military background, ('it's all hypothetical'), and he get's involved in some "Death wish", like activities, that may be a totally different scenario legally. It all depends on the attorney and weather someone sues him, or if the state has some recorse to file charges, although I have no idea what they would be. It's a very leading and subjective question, although a good mental exercise
     
  10. jason10mm

    jason10mm Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    432
    Location:
    Savannah, Georgia
    The only way self defense could be "pre-meditated" was if you intentionally provoked an attack, then "defended" you way out of it. Of course that would actually be pre-meditated murder, unless you got away with it :p

    Simply being PREPARED FOR or ANTICIPATING an event does not mean you pre-meditated it.
     
  11. MiddleAgedKen

    MiddleAgedKen Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Fairview Park, OH
    One of those would be more than enough to suit me, thanks. Your man saved that employee's life, whatever else happened. Being moved to the back is just the precursor to your neighbors hearing you "were shot execution-style after a robbery."

    He carries more tools than I probably would, but his reasons are none of my business.
     
  12. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    Sure you're planning ahead by carrying. You are planning ahead to do something LEGAL--defend yourself against imminent deadly force.

    You folks are getting way too hung up on the notion of premeditation. It's a concept that applies to distingush between degrees of homicide. Lawful self defense defeats any claim of homicide. If you plot to make a homicide APPEAR TO BE self defense when it really wasn't, then you lose your defense because you weren't really in imminent harm of death. Not because you planned ahead.

    The issue there has nothing to do with premeditation or planning ahead. If you provoke the attack by unlawfully assaulting the other guy first or unlawfully drawing on him first, then your state's self defense law may no longer deem your actions justified. Just walking around a bad neighborhood does not mean you have to accept getting killed by a mugger.
     
  13. Phil DeGraves

    Phil DeGraves Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,531
    "He carries more tools than I probably would, but his reasons are none of my business."

    You don't want to lose a gunfight for lack of shooting back...
     
  14. Sebastian the Ibis
    • Contributing Member

    Sebastian the Ibis Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,818
    Location:
    "The Gunshine State"
    "Pre-meditation" is tricky since it involves some sort of planning ahead, but there is no set rule as to how much.

    If a crazy gunman started shooting up your school/office/post-office etc. and you went to your car for a weapon and returned and killed him. That would come pretty close to pre-meditated self defense.

    "self" is an issue, but in this case you would be in danger just as much as the other victims so I think it would count.
     
  15. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    So what? Do you folks think there's a law against planning ahead for lawful self defense? In the case of the school shooting, you'd be going to lawfully defend others and most likely yourself as well. Maybe not the brightest idea, but not homicide. It would only be illegal homicide if you waited until he was no longer a threat and THEN killed him in retribution. But that applies whether you planned it ahead or not.
     
  16. Honu

    Honu Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    21
    not the same thing as premeditation but if you went into a bad area you know you would not go normally but if armed you chose to !
    then a prosecutor might have more chance you planned and wanted to get into a altercation than if you were not armed

    this is why also I think if you carry think about it and where you go !!!

    if I know a area is bad I stay away when I carry I would not go into that area knowing I am armed now !
    that may get you into trouble !

    this is in theory remember :)
     
  17. Josh Aston

    Josh Aston Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Mountain Home, ID
    Self defense is always based upon the action of the perpetrator. The crime is the action of the perpetrator. Self defense cannot be premeditated because it is a reaction. I can place myself in a situation where I am more likely to be involved in a self defense scenario, but my reactions are still dependent upon the actions of the criminal. If he/she chooses to respond to a lower level of force then lethal force will not be used and the criminal will live to see another day.
     
  18. 357WheelGun

    357WheelGun Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Messages:
    181
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Seattle
    The key here is realising the difference between the legal term, "pre-meditated", and the common usage of the same term.

    In law, "pre-meditation" applies only to crime. That is to say that you cannot, as far as the legal system is concerned, "pre-meditate" anything that is not a crime. E.g. you cannot "pre-meditate" taking your family to Disneyland in June.

    In everyday usage, the term "pre-meditation" can apply to any planning that takes place prior to an event, so in everyday usage, one can, and almost certainly always does, "pre-meditate" a family trip to Disneyland.

    So the answer becomes more difficult. From a legal perspective, there is no such thing as "pre-meditated" self-defense for the simple reason that self-defense is not a crime and, in the legal world, "pre-meditation" applies only to crimes. To the average man on the street, however, the concept of "pre-meditation" is broader and can encompass non-criminal activities (such as my example of a family vacation to Disneyland).
     
  19. makarovnik

    makarovnik Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,677
    Sorry, I didn't read your entire post (it was kind of long). But in response to your question: Absolutely! I have some drug dealing neighbors that have threatened me and my family and of course the cops won't do anything about it. I live in Washington so the cops are pretty much worthless and with the overly Liberal attitude around here the criminals have WAY more rights than the law abiding citizens.

    Anyway I have thought about it many times how and under what circumstances I would defend myself. I've even thought a lot about whether or not I would even report the incident. If nobody sees or hears anything:)
     
  20. bogie

    bogie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,569
    Location:
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    Just an aside, but what is with all the labels?

    I've seeing a lots of ones and zeros, on or off, black and white, and very little of shades of grey, much less the rest of the spectrum.
     
  21. HadEmAll

    HadEmAll Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    250
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Absolutely.

    If I wanted to, I guarantee that within an hour, I could find a situation that would allow me to shoot somebody in self-defense. Just by driving to certain parts of town, and walking down the street.

    Whether I could get away with it would depend on what kind of story I could manufacture as to why I was there.

    All my instincts and desires are to avoid doing that.
     
  22. MiddleAgedKen

    MiddleAgedKen Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    269
    Location:
    Fairview Park, OH
    I think I could manage two, maybe--if I ever needed more than that, maybe it's just my last message from G_d... ;-)
     
  23. Eric F

    Eric F Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,934
    I have been threatened with premeditated Self-Defense .

    I had a room mate that liked to get drunk and get mouthy really bad. So one day when he was sober we talked it out and he came right out and said he wanted to prevoke me into a fight so he could shoot me in self defense as I weighed more than 100 pounds more than he did. ok great. I moved out the next day no problem.

    hence my stance on drunks and guns! its no fun comming home and finding rour room mate drunk on the couch pointing a glock at you as you walk through the door. Also hapened 1 time, visit from the sheriff

    So yes you can.
     
  24. Kentak

    Kentak Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,467
    Location:
    Ohio
    I suppose some yahoo could purposely take a stroll late at night through a part of town where his kind isn't common or welcome with the thought of provoking a confrontation merely by his presence. That would be a very warped and dangerous thing to do. If he did succeed in setting up a self-defense shooting, he would probably not get a free walk. There would be some pointed questions as to his reasons for choice of late night activities.

    K
     
  25. Jiggle

    Jiggle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Lake Worth, FL
    If self defense can be premeditated, then basically every person with a CCW (or a gun kept for self-defense) is guilty of the "crime".

    I understand the OP's question. Many of us have taken extensive courses that focus on defeating a human attacker, and I would venture to guess that pretty much everybody here has shot at a human sillouette target. Many of us own several, if not dozens of firearms, and many of us have more than one within reach of us at any given time. Just typing this I have 3 firearms within arm's reach. There are plenty of people out there who would say that I am just looking for trouble, that I am hoping somebody will break in so I can kill them.

    I think that given the right circumstances, an anti-gun prosecutor could decide that a person had committed "premeditated" self-defense (which is pretty much just murder). If the person has an extensive firearms and ammo collection and has lots of training, the media could easily paint the picture that this person had just been wating for somebody to come along and rub him the wrong way. It could be made even worse if the state didn't have a "castle doctrine" (I am assuming here that the original crime occurs on the person's property).

    Even though the chances of somebody being convicted of such a charge may be slim, it is not out of the realm of possibility. Because of this, I know several people who refuse to alter their firearms from stock condition. Their view is that it would look better if the thug breaking into their house is shot with a "hunting" shotgun with a wood stock and 28" barrel than with a "tactical" gun with a pistol grip, folding stock, extended magazine tube with an 18" barrel and a SureFire light and laser mounted up top.

    I don't believe that there is any legal term for "premeditated self-defense", but a motivated anti could still cause somebody quite a bit of grief. It's sad that we have gotten to the point that simply by exercising our rights, we are considered a hazard to society.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page