what would you have done in this situation?

[Gouranga]

In NC you absolutely would not bring the firearm into it.

First off, if any of those kids instigated it, you do not have auth to use deadly force to protect them, not even if the guys were using guns. Since you did not see what started it and did not 100% know the folks with the bats were the aggressors, coming out waving a gun would get you arrested.

Second, now you have taken the gun away, do you really intend to go out into a situation like that, against numerous potential opponents with baseball bats with no idea as to what is going on? Doing so, IMO, is a serious risk to yourself. For all you knew, protecting the high schoolers may actually put you in the position of protecting the bad guys. They may have just gang raped an 81 yr old for all you know at that point.

Third, put in the same position, the MOST I would do, (I would be wearing my conceal weapon as I always do) from a distance, is advise them that the police are en route, and that they would be best to break it up. The only way that gun sees daylight is if they advance on me on my property after getting the warning.

I know there are those who feel that the right course of action would be to go all "hero", swing on in there and save the day, bring order to the universe but I would not see any way that would play out. Especially without any idea as to what is going on.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

....who beat up a 5 year old who.......

another member posted that as a joke. i have no idea why they beat up the 12 year old.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

 

[Boba Fett]

Sorry, but I would call the police and then try to break it up though I wouldn't show a weapon if at all possible. I still have my old Acme Thunderer and it's pretty good for getting attention.

I don't have to know the back story; that's for the police to figure out. What the adults were doing counts as felony aggravated assault in this state and could have turned into either murder or manslaughter. I don't care what the high school kids had done; that's also for the police to handle. If they had beaten up a smaller youngster, the police have methods of dealing with that. But an adult does not have the right to exact "justice" in this fashion.

Maybe it's just me, but when I was a teenager a woman from my town named Kitty Genovese was murdered while 39 people did nothing. More recently, a man died in the streets of New York while people just walked by his body. I really, really do not like to see violence if I can do anything about it.

And I can always make more eggs.

I agree with TexasBill. I'm a bit appalled by some of what I'm reading.

Many of you are making judgment calls based on info you would only have after the fact.


Here's the bottom line. Someone is being threatened by someone else with deadly force - one hit by a bat in the right place and it DOA.

Doesn't mean the first step you jump to is to pull your gun, but you certainly want to tell everyone involved the police are on their way and they need to back off NOW. If it comes to it and you have to use your firearm to stop them from assaulting or killing the other party or even yourself, fine. They're the law breakers regardless of how much the other party may "deserved" a beating. Again, that's information you don't have and info for the police to sort out. The here and now of that situation was the assault with a bat taking place in front of you.

Do what is right, not what is convenient or comfortable.


On a side note:
Thank God I live in Texas where we can use deadly force to defend other people. I hope I never have to, but at least the laws on the books are in my favor.


EDIT
As for the eggs...I like them. They're also pretty good cold. Especially with ketchup.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

 

[Maverick223]

Sounds like a good use for that rubber buckshot that you knew would eventually come in handy. Then everyone gets a good a$$ whoopin'.

In all seriousness, I couldn't stand there and watch someone being beaten by a baseball bat, but that doesn't mean I would go out waving a firearm either.

 

[03Shadowbob]

I know there are those who feel that the right course of action would be to go all "hero", swing on in there and save the day, bring order to the universe but I would not see any way that would play out.

So to try and stop a potential murder you would think someone was trying to be a hero? Maybe that "hero" just walks a little more bow legged than others here do that say they would do nothing. It is not about being a hero. It is about doing what you feel is right to do and a lot of what someone thinks is the right thing to do comes from the way that person was raised.

 

[shockwave]

Can't answer this one for everybody, but I can answer for me: I do not live in a neighborhood where adults beat up kids with bats. In fact, there is no street violence on the street where I live. I like it that way.

So if something is going on like that out there and I don't get involved, then I'm tacitly agreeing with the proposition that I live in a place where such behavior is permissible. So...

1. Call cops or have someone in the house make the call.
2. Go outside and with the authority voice yell, "What the Sam Hill is going on out here?!"

Play it from there. Might bring some OC spray on the way out the door, but probably not a firearm. Whatever, I'm not inclined to have people being beaten up in front of my house if there's anything I can do to prevent it.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

Can't answer this one for everybody, but I can answer for me: I do not live in a neighborhood where adults beat up kids with bats. In fact, there is no street violence on the street where I live. I like it that way.

i would like to live in this utopia as well.

 

[ForumSurfer]

In NC you absolutely would not bring the firearm into it.

I carry concealed, if I am involved my firearm is likely there. Here's the law in NC:

(4) Deadly Force in Defence of Others
A Citizen may intervene and use deadly force in defence of another person when, under the facts and circumstances, it reasonably appeared necessary to save the other person from imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault but only to the extent the other person was entitled to use deadly force in self-defence.
(5) Deadly Force MAY NOT Be Used:
(a) To Stop a Simple Assault.The exact point in time a simple assault becomes deadly is often unclear. Repeated blows to vital body areas, choking, continued beating on a helpless or weakened victim, are some indicators.

Hopefully no one would have walked up and opened fire. Try to calm the situation down (out of reach of those bats), and retreat if need be and if not on your own property as there is no duty to retreat while on your own property in NC.

Many of you are making judgment calls based on info you would only have after the fact.

I agree. I probably would have gotten involved. The kids may have deserved a beating, but the bats are a little extreme. I would have seen kids, bats and acted. I've stepped in the middle of other issues even after learning my lesson with the beer bottle to the back of my head. I just learned that if you step into a situation like that, trust neither side.

 

[Gouranga]

You missed this:

1 (c)The person using deadly force was not an instigator or aggressor who voluntarily provoked, entered, or continued the conflict leading to deadly force, and

and

(4) Deadly Force in Defence of Others
A Citizen may intervene and use deadly force in defence of another person when, under the facts and circumstances, it reasonably appeared necessary to save the other person from imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault but only to the extent the other person was entitled to use deadly force in self-defence.

If that person instigated the fight he/she is not justified in using lethal force and you are not justified in using it to protect them

 

[bri]

Call 911. Finish eggs.

Unless someone you know and care about is on the receiving end of the baseball bat, you have no business inserting yourself into a situation like that, especially if you're armed.

+1.

Unless it was obvious that someone was being beaten to possible death, I can't see jumping into someone else's business, much less armed.

 

[Gouranga]

We covered the type of scenario in depth in my NC CCW and it came down to you cannot protect someone with lethal force if they could not use it themselves legally. ergo If someone instigates the conflict, you cannot protect them with lethal force if they get in over their heads.

Now that being said, you can use less lethal options such as pepper spray/tazer/etc but should you kill one of them accidentally, you could run into issue with the same law as an attorney would argue, they died so you used lethal force.

As for the "hero" comment, no offense intended there. I find it common that folks' knee jerk reaction is to do "the right thing" and get in there to help them. Many times it is because they see it as a black and white issue but the OP stated, when he went out there, he had no idea what was going on. He saw men going after old teens with baseball bats.

IMO, you call the cops, from a safe distance yell out to them that the police are on the way and they'd best disperse. From there any additional actions I would take would depend highly on the situation, how things unfold, etc. There are just so many dynamics to such a situation, beyond the first move (call the cops, etc), I think any debate on what you'd do after those actions calls for too much conjecture on how everyone reacts to that first action.

 

[Warhawk83]

call the police

advise the "adults" that the cops are on the way and that they should hold the thugs for the police

+1..

 

[Maverick223]

If that person instigated the fight he/she is not justified in using lethal force and you are not justified in using it to protect them

Per the description, the individual(s) being threatened did not instigate the fight. They had an altercation with someone prior to the engagement with the bat swinging adults. If that were considered instigating the fight that would be akin to saying that the defendant could never have been an aggressor in any previous engagement. Furthermore, if the instigator fulfills his duty to retreat, he can then engage the aggressor (that exhibits intent to use deadly force) in kind. The kids were fleeing from the bat wielding adults, freeing themselves from any obligation of retreat prior to use of deadly force, therefore the use of such force is justified by an extraneous observer (per NC law).

 

[Boba Fett]

If that person instigated the fight he/she is not justified in using lethal force and you are not justified in using it to protect them

1) Revenge beatings are not justified. Not according to the law anyway.

2) Stepping in to prevent a kid from being beaten or murdered by adults with bats is certainly acceptable and, based on the law you posted, seems like deadly force by a firearms owner observing the situation as it unfolded in the street would have been acceptable in that case if it came to it (hopefully it wouldn't).
The firearms owner in this circumstance was not a witness to the supposed beating these adults wanted revenge for. They were not defending someone with bats. They were assaulting kids. That's all that had been witnessed.



Now, do I think the punk teenagers deserved to be severely punished or prosecuted for beating up a younger kid? Assuming a lot of facts we don't have (like they did so just to be a bullies or that the adults weren't just making that up) then yes, I do think they should. But bats are extreme and deadly. And if someone came through my neighborhood chasing some kids with bats, I would not let that stand. Call to the police and a very stern order for them to break it up and the police were on their way. And if they persisted to beat the kids with bats or came at me with them, then my options start disappearing fast.

 

[Gouranga]

the individual(s) being threatened did not instigate the fight

The OP did not know that until after initiating his course of action.

if the instigator fulfills his duty to retreat, he can then engage the aggressor

Absolutely. And these guys were retreating, however, from what we were told at our course, the idea of whether the duty to retreat was fulfilled, can be a gray area, unless the kids, said out loud something to the effect "We no longer wish to engage in this confrontation.". Either way it is something that would have to be argued at your trial. I am digging insanely trying to find the cases he gave us on this...I did remember it was not as cut and dry in the courtroom as I would have thought it would be. Also, civil suits...you would be in trouble.

Don't get me wrong Maverick, I completely understand your wanting to do the right thing and not just sitting there watching these kids get beat. As other posters have said, a baseball bat is a nasty weapon easily capable of inflicting lethal wounds. I do not relish the idea of not getting in there to help the kids out and potentially watching someone get beat to death without putting an end to it. Morally I feel getting involved is the right thing to do. However, the way our wonderful legal system works, I could not afford to leave my kids fatherless and homeless as the result of a criminal and civil trial either.

 

[Boba Fett]

Morally I feel getting involved is the right thing to do. However, the way our wonderful legal system works, I could not afford to leave my kids fatherless and homeless as the result of a criminal and civil trial either.

Maybe it's just me, but when I was a teenager a woman from my town named Kitty Genovese was murdered while 39 people did nothing. More recently, a man died in the streets of New York while people just walked by his body. I really, really do not like to see violence if I can do anything about it.

What if it were your kids being chased? Would you want some other father to just let them be beat to death? Or would you want him to be a Sheepdog and, fully realizing the potential consequence, do the right thing and save your children?

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

 

[Maverick223]

Absolutely. And these guys were retreating, however, from what we were told at our course, the idea of whether the duty to retreat was fulfilled, can be a gray area, unless the kids, said out loud something to the effect "We no longer wish to engage in this confrontation.".

If they were running from bat wielding adults (per the OP's own description), I think their duty to retreat was fulfilled in whole. Granted, I hope to never be forced to prove my case in a criminal proceeding in order to become that precedent, but I believe it would be completely justified; the outcome of the civil case to follow, not nearly as certain.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

unless the kids, said out loud something to the effect "We no longer wish to engage in this confrontation.".

i can't see anyone saying such a thing in a confrontation such as this.

 

[wishin]

While it would be fun to go out there shooting a handgun in the air and shouting "break it up", the "call the police and finish breakfast" approach is prudent. No need to get hurt, or arrested for being a good semaritan in such a case. There would be circumstances where I'd get involved, but this is not one.

 

[GEM]

Interesting assumption - you run out with a gun because they have bats.

Ok - consider that some of them might have a gun and shoot you in the heat of the moment.

Whether it is right or wrong - I didn't see anyone consider that if they intervened, they might be easily eliminated. Oops, if I missed that.

If you decide to beat someone, might you take a gun.

In all these interventionist threads, there is always an assumption by some that the odds are in your favor.

You can google interventionists who get killed as they did the right thing.

You can't live with yourself if you don't do the right thing or you can't live without yourself if you are dead?

 

[Warhawk83]

I forgot to add, I actually have to call the police and yell at stupid kids 3-4 times per year for fighting. A hell of a lot more than that for stereo equipment and being drunk. They come out here with 50 of em and watch two morons beat each other senseless and then they shake hands....

I live right across the way from a highly trafficked boat ramp with a huge unlit and unguarded parking lot.

 

[Stirling XD]

When I was younger I probably would have jumped in to rescue the teens from a beatdown by armed adults. But jumping into a situation while armed can carry some serious consequenses. Defending your actions in doing so can get costly if you actually pull the trigger. The last thing I want to do is risk my home, 401k, my family's future and/or my freedom to stop a bullies vs. bullies fight.

The police have already been called. It's not like calling again will get them there any faster. If you don't want to see a group of armed adult bullies beating a bunch of unarmed teen bullies, throw the teens your golf clubs. If there's one thing a bully hates, it's a fair fight.

 

[Boba Fett]

While it would be fun to go out there shooting a handgun in the air and shouting "break it up", the "call the police and finish breakfast" approach is prudent. No need to get hurt, or arrested for being a good semaritan in such a case. There would be circumstances where I'd get involved, but this is not one.

Why do you make the assumption that there would be gun waving? I certainly haven't said or implied that one should rush out with their gun drawn. Quite the contrary, concealed is the best method until it is needed to stop an immediate threat to yourself or those kids.


My question for you is, at what point is calling the police not good enough for you? Is permanently crippled an acceptable beating? Maybe life as a vegetable....after all they'd still be technically alive. Or would you just let these adults beat the kids to death?

Interesting assumption - you run out with a gun because they have bats.

Yeah...because I wouldn't want to be beat to death and because I don't want to see some kids beat to death either. Now, as for the gun being in the open/drawn, no. It can be concealed...waving it around is foolish and I have not implied or said to run out with it drawn.


Ok - consider that some of them might have a gun and shoot you in the heat of the moment.

There are all sort of what ifs you can dream up. But that still doesn't absolve you from doing the right thing. The biggest what if is, what if they turned those kids heads into tapioca while you stood there and watched?

Whether it is right or wrong - I didn't see anyone consider that if they intervened, they might be easily eliminated. Oops, if I missed that.

True, one might get killed. But what if it were your kids? Would you want someone to standby while some out of control adults beat them to death with baseball bats? Why is it that only when there is no personal risk, then and only then is it acceptable to have honor, decency, and civic duty?

If you decide to beat someone, might you take a gun.

In all these interventionist threads, there is always an assumption by some that the odds are in your favor.

No, I don't assume the odds are in my favor. The odds may determine how I approach the situation. In other words, odds often determine tactics. But that starts to get into dreaming up crazy situations. So we'll stick to this situation.

You can google interventionists who get killed as they did the right thing.

I'm sure we can. I wonder how many of those people saved the other person. They are heroes in my book. Doing the right thing might mean you'll die in the process. There were a bunch of "interventionists" on flight 93. But as I said, I call them heroes.

You can't live with yourself if you don't do the right thing or you can't live without yourself if you are dead?

Are those my only options? Am I allowed to live and have done the right thing? Or are you saying that it is acceptable to do the wrong thing as long as you live? And you left out the option of doing nothing to help and still dying. Again, flight 93. They died. They did the right thing. Should they have just sat in their seats? In their case, they would have died anyway as the plane crashed into the capitol. So there is always the option of doing nothing and still dying.

Again, I'm appealed by the lack of Sheepdog mentality among firearm owners. Where's the common decency and desire to protect your fellow man? When you see some kids about to be beat up by adults with bats, your first reaction is to say, "Not hurting me...none of my business...hope someone called the police. Good show though...kind of a reality TV thing going on." :banghead:


I know my words are probably a bit harsh. Many of you I'm disagreeing with on this matter I've agreed with elsewhere. So please don't take it too personally. But I hope you or someone reading this will reconsider their world view.

I encourage you all to watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW8BZ7pRt28
Hopefully it will give you some insight.