Should Aid be Rendered?

[CoolRide]

I was always taught that IF you shoot, you shoot to kill (mom and pop said dead peaple can't sue) so there would be no upper thigh strike, it would be
middle chest/face hit with either 45 acp or 500 mag and therfore probably
no other decision would need to be made.


CoolRide

 

[Parallax]

Another thing, while you're busy playing doctor his partner could be sneaking up behind you...

 

[coylh]

The procedure for dealing with a recently shot home invader are as follows:

1. STOP!
2. DON'T TOUCH!
3. LEAVE THE AREA!
4. TELL AN ADULT!

 

[CAS700850]

I beg to differ

Okay, lots of posts talk about rendering air meaning that you regret shooting the BG, so it will be used against you in Court. Flip that coin over. You shoot the guy in the leg, and the Coroner testifies that the cause of death was exsanguination. He bled out. And, good Dr. Coroner testifies that this probably took 2-4 minutes after the shot, with the guy probably losing consciousness after 1-2 minutes. So, says Mr. Prosecutor, what was the shooter doing during the 2-4 minutes, and especially the last 2 or 3 minutes when the person could not have been a threat? Watching him bleed out? Sounds like intent to kill, not intent to stop the threat. Sounds like a Manslaughter indictment to me. It'll go something like this:

Lawyer: Mr. Shooter, after the BG fell as a result of your shot to his thigh, what did you do?
Shooter: I watched him and ensured that he was no longer a threat to my safety and the safety of my family.
Lawyer: So, as the coroner testified, the BG lost consciousness after a minute or two. He did, didn't he?
Shooter: Eventually.
Lawyer: And at that point, what did you do?
Shooter: I maintained cover on him until LE/EMT's arrived.
Lawyer: And records show that they arrived about five minutes after you called, correct?
Shooter: That sounds about right.
Lawyer: So, for five minutes, you watched BG bleeding to death on your floor, and never so much as bent over to offer him first aid?
Shooter: He was still a threat to my safety...
Lawyer: But he was unconscious for at least half of that time, and obiously wasn't a threat at that point, correct?
Shooter: I didn't know if he was faking...
Lawyer: Well, the lake of blood by his leg wasn't fake, was it?
Shooter: No, but...
Lawyer: You didn't even check to see if he was awake, or even breathing for that matter?
Shooter: No, he was still a threat...
Lawyer: You mean that unconscious and dying BG at your feet was still dangerous? In what way?
Shooter: He might have been faking it, waiting to jump me.
Lawyer: Well, he certainly wasn't faking bleeding to death, now was he?
Shooter: No.
Lawyer: In fact, isn't it true that you stood there and watched him bleed because you wanted him to die?
Shooter: NO! I didn't want him to die, but...
Lawyer: But you didn't do anything to even try to stop that?
Shooter: I called for help, but he was too dangerous to get close to.
Lawyer: The unconscious man blleding to death on your carpet was too dangerous? Was he still dangerous when he stopped bleeding because he was out of blood?

Pretty ugly. Now, imagine this scenario instead:

Lawyer: You shot BG in the leg?
Shooter: Correct.
Lawyer: You didn't have to do that, did you?
Shooter: Excuse me, I don't understand.
Lawyer: Well, obviously, he wasn't a real threat to you?
Shooter: He was very much a threat.
Lawyer: He was so dangerous that you were able to help him with his injuries?
Shooter: He had presented a threat when he brandished teh knife and came at me. I shot him to stop the threat. After he was shot, I convinced him to drop the knife. I kicked it away from him. I then tried to give basic first aid...pressure on the injury...while keeping myself safe.
Lawyer: So what your saying is that you didn't mean to hurt him, and you were trying to correct your mistake by treating his injury?
Shooter: Not at all. I shot him because he was a threat. I didn't shoot him to kill, I shot him to stop his threatening behaviors. So, once I was able to stop his threatening behavior, I tried to help with the injuries. I shot him to protect myself and my family, not to kill him. And, then I tried to do what I could to help him survive the injuries.

Which situation do you think would sell better to a jury of people, most of whom get their knowledge of guns and tactics from television and the movies?

(By the way, the exchanges were written for dramatic effect. Neither represent how an actual exchange would occur in Court, as there would no doubt be objections and a far lengthier manner of questioning. You attorneys out there, forgive me for seeking to be brief. You non-lawyers out there, you are welcome for me being brief. )

 

[CZ52GUY]

re: Beg to differ

I beg to dissent with the "differentiation".

This is not England. The knife holding perp' is not merely exercising his right to defend himself against a homicidal homeowner, depriving him of income from his chosen vocation, or worse his chosen way to engage in "entertainment/companionship".

There are "Alice-down-the-rabbit-hole" DA's that might pursue this line of thinking, but in that moment, the threat remains while he is still armed. His presence in your home with a weapon speaks to his intent. No reasonable person can expect you to render aid while he's armed. No reasonable person can expect you to believe the threat has been resolved by a leg wound with a handgun. He may bleed out and expire, but rendering aid could put you or your loved one in the position of being killed by a soon to be corpse.

The issue of risk of potential infection cannot be ignored either. Tangible risk of immediate physical harm (or delayed harm via disease) vs. possible risk of criminal or civil liability later. That appears to be the bottom line choice to be made.

At least the living can have their day in court and fight the legal system for their God-given right to defend themselves. The dead don't do too well.

My 2 cents...

Stay safe,

CZ52'

 

[GEM]

I seem to have left my EEG at the office, thus even though the knife wielding attacker had closed his eyes, I had no way of determing if he actually lost consciousness.

So Mr. DA and your hypothetical speculation -

Or:

To be sure he had lost consciousness and we could treat him, I sent my wife to the Vetinary store to buy a tranquilzer gun so that I could shoot him up with a nonlethal dose of tranq. By the time she got back, the coroner took him away.

Or:

To be sure he was helpless, we sprayed with OC and then tasered him. Then we put on full hazmat care and then we ...

The what - if's are endless. I think we have clear consensus approaching a dude is dangerous and the biohazard risk is not yours to take.

 

[HI express]

Luck?

Werewolf,
My kind of luck? I'd be the one on the floor bleeding out.
In all honesty? He started the ball ...he is now suffering the consequence of doing what he did.
Having said that, he is probably wide awake...for a little while anyway. I believe that I toss him a big enough towel so that he can tie his own tourniquet if he so wants. If not, he starts sopping up his blood on the floor with that towel.
I'm not suicidal. Get within reach of this guy after he broke into my domain, tried to kill me while committing a break in, probably tried to kill my loved one (and my wife also?---whoops, typo)
Serious, dude, he's still armed and dangerous and I wouldn't want to get within reach of this guy so that he could try to gut me like a hog.
Years back, my roommate and I pulled this neighbor off of his wife as he was using her face for a punching bag. We knew this couple...when he wasn't drunk, this neighbor was one of the nicest guys around.
We were walking this guy out of his apartment to get him some fresh air and to stop him from beating his wife's face to a pulp, when this a-hole pulled a straight edge razor on me, sliced my left thumb to the bone!
This was 35 years ago. I still hurt when I pick up anything heavier than 30 pounds. I have trouble with weak hand drills in shooting. It hurts like hell on cold days. Don't ever want to go to a knife fight without a gun again.
(Shrug) my decisions are based on my personal experiences.

 

[Old Dog]

I think we have clear consensus

Yep, from a lot of people who've never been in this position before ...

Lots of hardcore operators in the Sly Stallone "Yer the disease, and I'm the cure" mode around here ... He's just human scum, flush 'im ... one less criminal ... good riddance ...

Yes, the threat of blood-borne pathogens is quite real, as well as the possibility of the intruder playing possum or still having enough fight left in him to do your or your wife harm. Still, many times it's pretty clear when someone is down hard with a life-taking wound.

I don't even care about the legal ramifications -- if I've had to shoot someone in my own house, the aftermath will be painful for all involved no matter the outcome.

Were this to happen in my area (somewhat rural), I can just see it now ... late at night, on the weekend, the local sheriff's deputies, the state patrol (no local PD) and the medical response units are all tied up with a vehicle mishap on the state highway ... I've gotta wait 30 minutes for the first responders to make the scene ... meanwhile, I've got one young miscreant, well aware he's gonna die, on my kitchen floor with a .45 ACP bullet in his femur, dark blood spraying from his inguinal area, twitching in pain, screaming for his mommy, calling his baby girl's name and asking Jesus to intervene to save his miserable life.

Yeah, I think the wife and I would don our gloves, get the knife out of the way, slap the steel cuffs or flex-cuffs on the guy and get some direct pressure applied or render whatever other basic first aid appears to be required ... I'm not completely without compassion for another human being, no matter how low this person has sunk in his life. I've had to deal with people who've attempted harm to me before, but the longer I'm walking the surface of this strange planet, the more I try to treat others the way the teacher from Nazareth recommended.

 

[HankB]

Approaching a bleeding bad guy who threatened me or my family with deadly force? (He came into my house with a knife!!) Not likely. Whether it's a case of the BG playing possum, the BG having a buddy, or the very real risk of bloodborne pathogens, I'm not endangering myself further by getting near him.

And I'm darned well going to "lawyer-up" before I make any statements to ANYONE beyond "I was in fear for my life!"

Just to complicate the moral issue - you are not lucky enough to live in a state like OK or CO that shields you from civil liability when a shooting takes place in one's home.

Maybe a lawyer can weigh in on this one - in a civil suit against you, who's more likely to prevail: a tearful bad guy (now in a 3-piece suit with shave and haircut) who's in a wheelchair, or the next of kin of a deceased, armed, home invader?

 

[carebear]

Old Dog,

I don't have cuffs, I have no reason to own a pair that aren't lined with satin and basically recreational.

I'm also not trained in proper police cuffing techniques, which that cute 18 year old may well have learned at their "disarming" class in bad guy finishing school. They actually do learn that stuff in there, the ones who know they are going to take up violent crime.

If he has 30 minutes to wait, and he disarms nice, I might give him some supplies and talk him through some self aid or something. I'm not sure the Chief Carpenter expects me to risk my families safety as well as my own.

CAS,

That might work for the grand jury but the minute a prosecutor starts asking why I just covered the guy and waited for EMT's I'd have my guy call the local Police trainer and EMT supervisor to the stand and have them walk through their doctrine on similar incidents, then point out I'm one guy alone without similar training. I'd win. A smart prosecutor isn't going to go there. Any aid I give, including throwing a towel, if my case is presented to the jury properly, absolves me in those circumstances and leaves me looking like Florence Nightengale.

 

[spacemanspiff]

the thought just occured to me, that i have hardly seen or heard of (doesnt mean it never happens) police giving first aid to suspects they have had to use deadly force on.

i base this on my watching the original reality tv show, COPS.

edit -

leaves me looking like Florence Nightengale.

dont forget that you actually do need to have the suspect conscious to answer a few questions:
1. was my presentation of my weapon more intimidating than, equally intimidating, or less intimidating than, anyone of your other victims that have fought back?
2. how would you rate my choice of ammunition, on a scale of 1-10?
3. would you have preferred me to confront you with a longgun instead of a handgun?
4. less filling? or tastes great?

 

[Zrex]

I would think that in this situation, dialing 9-1-1 would be an apropriate level of "aid" rendered to the criminal.

If someone breaks into my house with a deadly weapon and I have to shoot him, I am going to be more concerned with getting my wife and baby girl out of there safely than making sure criminal-guy lives. Besides, what if he has the AIDS or something?

 

[jpIII]

In my self defense course, I was taught that if there is one bad guy, then there IS a second.

Also, in that same course, the instructor told personal stories about perps faking the extent of injuries just to get you in close. Some of those stories still make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. Before I attended his course, it was just the type of thing I would have fallen for.

Your first priority is to protect yourself and your wife/children from the accomplice that you should be expecting.

 

[CommanderPoopyduX]

I'm still confused.......Why'd you shoot him in the leg?

 

[enfield303]

12 Gauge with Buckshot really doesn't wound......

 

[Tim Burke]

This question comes up from time to time, much like Christoper Lee in the old Dracula movies. Let me attempt to drive a stake through its heart.
For the scenario proposed, I would suggest the appropriate action is to cover him, have someone else call 911 requesting police and EMS response, order him to drop the knife, and instruct him on where to apply pressure in the groin so as to minimize blood loss.
For an apparently unconscious and incapacitated intruder, I'd recommend the same.
Why?
Determining the level of consciousness of someone who isn't shamming can be difficult, even if one is trained and experienced.
Determining the degree of incapacitaion can also be difficult, even in some one who isn't shamming.
Here is what you know:
1. Moments ago, you believed the intruder to pose a threat which justified the use of lethal force.
2. He now appears to offer no threat.
What you do not know:
1. What is his level of consciousness?
2. Is he incapacitated?
3. Where are his weapons? Even if you see one, you can't rule out the presence of more.
4. Does he have an accomplice?
5. If he is unconscious, how will he respond if he regains consciousness?
Given what you don't know, I maintain that there is absolutely no way that you can approach the intruder in relative safety. Even with trained back-up, approaching him may be quite dangerous.
How safe would it have to be for me to approach the guy? It would have to be completely safe. No ethical issue can reasonably require that you risk your life for one who just put you in fear of your own life.
I haven't even addressed the practical problems to approaching him, because I wouldn't even consider approaching him voluntarily. For instance, do you take your weapon, and leave yourself vulnerable to a disarm? Or do you leave your weapon behind? Neither sounds attractive to me.
Distance is your friend. Maintain it. Calling 911 is rendering aid, and it is the only helpful thing you can do safely without his cooperation.
I addressed this question on the tactics list back in 1998, so if this post seems familiar to you, that may be where you have seen it. Back then, I think I was in the minority. I am pleased to see a number of people now espousing a similar view.
Might a lawyer make an issue of this? Sure, he might make an issue of anything. If you do CPR, he might claim you were trying to make him exsanguinate. No one would think of doing that? Wrong, Joseph Wambaugh had a character in a book (The Black Marble, IIRC) do exactly that, so someone has thought of it. Don't worry so much about what a lawyer might say. Worry about being able to justify your actions. Worry about what the intuder might do.

 

[SMLE]

If I'm dealing with an armed intruder, he's getting shot until he's down. As long as I can see him in my sights, I'm shooting til slide lock. I'm then going to go to cover, reload, then call 911 and ask for po po and EMS. Now I AM an EMT, AND I have worked as an armed security officer and been trained to use hand cuffs but I am NOT going to move in on an unkown threat by myself.

EMT training stresses scene safety heavily, and in any case where there is potential armed subject, we are supposed to let the cops deal with it first and tell us when it's clear. At least that's what I was taught here in Albuquerque.

As for moral issues, the Torah says that if a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck so that he is killed, there is no guilt for his death. (Exodus Chapter 22.) The assumption is that he is expecting people to be in the house who will try to resist him and he is prepared to use violence against them.

For a Rabbi's opinion on this click; http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0112.htm

 

[NHBB]

I have nothing of merit to really add to this conversation but found it extremely interesting. me personally, I would clear my loved ones out and keep my distance and wait for the cavalry...

I must say though, the wit some of you guys posess is absolutely hysterical... and I mean that in a good way. Even reading some of these posts that are meant to be serious, sometimes I have to keep from spewing my drink all over the keyboard with the sense of humor of some of these responses. Truly a bunch of smart people here who are too funny for their own good.

 

[444]

I would not attempt to provide aid.
In my opinion, the odds are that it isn't going to do any good and there are tons of negatives that could happen.
First of all, forget about the tourniquet. That is a movie prop. I have worked for over 20 years as a professional paramedic in high call volume EMS systems and have never used a tourniquet. I have been on more than one gun shot wound to the leg call and never used a tournquet. Most of the training I have had in regard to dealing with tourniquets is about the potential serious problems that can be caused by using a tourniquet. If the bullet simply went through the thigh muscle, I doubt that he is going to bleed out. If he is bleeding seriously enough that he IS going to bleed out, there is very little I can do for him: I have no equipment to handle the situation. It doesn't matter if you are a trauma surgeon, an RN, a paramedic: this isn't TV. You need equipment to treat seriously injured people and I don't have it at home. Trauma is a surgical disease. The bleeding you need to stop is inside the body. He needs surgery. If I responed on this call in a paramedic unit, I would consider any time I spent on scene treating this injury to be time wasted. My entire focus would be on getting him to a trauma center ASAP: I would do what I could for him enroute: high flow oxygen, two large bore IVs running wide open.
I live in a fairly large city with rapid EMS response times. That is his best chance.

 

[mbs357]

You probably could give aid...
But without the responses in the first few posts, I wouldn't feel it'd be worth it.
"ooo save the man who broke into my home at 3AM with a knife..."

 

[Black Snowman]

He's only hit once and still has a weapon? I think I'd be shooting again, he's not stopped, he's still an armed threat. If all I have is a handgun then two to the COM, one to the head, check for other threats. If I have my normal HD weapon, a shotty with 12 ga slugs, one to the COM, scan for threats, if he's still a danger, another shot. Find a safe place to hold up and wait for the cavalry in case there are more, top off the shotgun, get the backup sidearm ready for action, wait with 911 on the cell phone.

He forfeited his membership in the community gene pool when he put my life in danger. No aid, no sympathy from me until I'm safe. Then I'll suffer through the moral dilemmas and question my actions when I have the luxury of time and safety. If I had a wife to protect too that would go double.

YMMV.

 

[Catuela]

My 2 pennies...

Old Dog wrote:

By the way, in the military, we do have our medical personnel treat the enemy wounded (after ours are treated) prior to processing them as prisoners-of-war.

This is an important statement but can be easily misconstrued. As a Marine 0311, currently with 8 years of active duty I would say that in this situation you would have no obligation to render aid to the "criminal" that illegally entered your home and endangered your family.

"criminal" does not equal "enemy"

Let the liberals and bleeding hearts cry all they want to and burn me at the stake, but to put it simply and in easy terms:
When we first invaded Iraq we were fighting an "enemy", we were fighting people who fought for their country and did so due to orders that were given to them by superiors in a chain of command.
The people that we are fighting now, the insurgents, are criminals.

The reason we protect and administer aid to "enemies" is because we (we being the military) are the same as the enemy. The military ultimetly fights because we are told to, we know that the other side fights for the same reason.

A criminal on the other hand has endangered you or your family for the sole purpose of his own individual gain. Therefore it is my belief that there is no responsibility for an idividual in a self-defense situation to render aid (other than calling 911) to a person that was in the act of commiting a potentially life threatening "crime"

 

[Trisha]

Ditto, HankB!

From an EMS perspective, I absolutely would not let anyone be exposed to the downed goblin's bodily fluids (blood, saliva, whatever). BSI protocols are second only to scene safety at this point!

If the threat is neutralized but still in contact with any weapon, wait until law enforcement secures the goblin and then turns the scene over to EMS!

No two ways about it.

A very prominent member of rural EMS has Hepatitis because he got sprayed in the face (he was wearing a mask) by a goblin shot in the thigh. The blood-borne disease entered through the paramedic's eyes (the goblin was later confirmed to have Hep as well as several other contagious diseases).

If it's a goblin, it simply isn't worth the risk.

If it's someone in emergency services who has been shot/knifed and requires immediate intervention or face death, then it's a different story - it's your call; always remembering there are no guarantees.

Trisha

 

[CAS700850]

Maybe I didn'tmake myself clear in the first post, with my "trial transcripts." I first fo all do not believe that rendering aid to a person you just shot in self-defense is either an admission of guilt of a statement of regret. And, I don't believe that a jury would see it that way either.

Second, for those of you who argued that a jury would support you in standing over the goblin as he bled out, do not be so sure. A true jury of your peers (THR members) would acquit you in a minute, and likely dispose of teh wrongful death civil case in your favor. However, remember that a jury pool is made up of people from both sides of the fence. The only thing guaranteed about a jury is that there are no guarantees.

By the way, I think it is tactically sound to keep the distance and maintain cover. I just have a concern about standing over a perp, watching him bleed out. I can guarantee a few people in my office here would push that through as an Involuntary Manslaughter charge, minimum.

 

[Nitram68]

I would get my family in my safe room (master bathroom), call the police and paramedics and tell them you've shot an armed intruder and that you are in the master bathroom with your family and to come at once. Advise you're not sure if there are other intruders.