When you decide to get physical you're opening Pandora's box

Phaedrus/69

Phaedrus/69

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
2,718
Location
Big Sky Country
Very sad and ridiculous case. Two guys get in an argument over a parking spot, one guy throws a punch which kills the other guy. He was sentenced to up to six years for involuntary manslaughter. I'm sure he had no idea what was going to happen but that's kind of the point- any time you choose violence you're setting something in motion that you can't fully control. Lots of lives ruined over a hot temper and a parking spot.

I think this is relevant to the purpose of this forum. Many folks, myself included, have discussed how carrying a firearm has to change your behavior. If you're carrying lethal force you must be more reasonable than the average guy. Ego is never a reason to pull your gun. But it's easy to forget that one's responsibility really isn't diminished just become one isn't carrying a firearm. You don't die from shame or looking foolish, if you can get out a situation at the cost of your pride that still might be a bargain price.
 
Ayoob's In the Gravest Extreme contains a passage in which he suggests carrying a twenty dollar bill wrapped around some object heavy enough to allow tossing across a barroom. The basic idea is to "buy off" a potential adversary in order to avoid a fight, and also to persuade a jury that you really did do everything you could have done beforehand.

I wasn't completely convinced, but as the decades pass I begin to suspect it is a peak of wisdom.

Here in 2025, it is entirely possible that even the slightest bit of physical violence will result in ruinous legal action. My personal plan is to do everything I possibly can to avoid such stuff, even at the price of my own ego. When there is no other option, of course, then violence should be immediate and overwhelming, but it truly should be the option for when you are utterly out of options.
 
If an 8th grader wants to fight me over a table in the cafeteria he has a problem. He needs to grow up.

If a 40 year old wants to fight me over a parking space at a mall, he still has the same problem. He needs to grow up.

He has a problem that he needs to fix, by himself. I have neither the responsibility nor ability to fix whatever problem he has going on in his own head.

I don't get in fights with children.
 
Phaedrus/69 said:
Many folks, myself included, have discussed how carrying a firearm has to change your behavior. If you're carrying lethal force you must be more reasonable than the average guy.
Click to expand...
This implies that if a large proportion of people are armed, the probability of violence will go down. "An armed society is a polite society." That assumes that the armed people are responsible and reasonable. But what if they are not? The incidence of violence will remain the same, but the consequences will be more deadly. In the OP's example, someone died from a thrown punch. That's fairly unusual. But it would not be unusual to die from a gunshot.

Anton Chekhov, the Russian playwright, had a rule that if a pistol is seen hanging on the wall in Act I, it must be used by the end of Act III. In other words, you don't introduce factors that turn out to be irrelevant. More broadly, mass carrying of guns is bound to result in more shooting incidents. That's simply the logical conclusion. Human nature is such that a certain proportion of gun carriers will not exercise restraint. (We in fact see this every day in the news.)
 
Anytime you escalate a situation you are taking a risk.

Had the guy's punch not killed him, he was still risking an escalated retaliation, that could have resulted in his death...

We were just talking and out of nowhere he punched me, so I...
 
skoro said:
Any critical encounter has the potential to go tragically wrong. It's best to attempt to de-escalate.

You'll never lose a fight you don't get into.
Click to expand...
Indeed!

Usually, the other person simply wants to be "right".

In his Shivworks "Managing Unknown Contacts" course, Craig Douglas suggests calmly accepting blame, apologizing, telling the other person they're "right", and then adding a short story to elicit some sympathy from the other person(s), such as, "Hey, my mind isn't in the right place at the moment. My (son, wife, mother, etc.) is in the hospital and he/she might not make it."
 
The only personal experience with violence beyond a kindergarten shoving match most people in our society have is what Hollywood puts on their screens. People get in fist fights and then drink together afterwards. Or the hero punches out the bad guy after he makes a disparaging comment and walks away with no consequences. Good drama but nowhere near reality.

Reality is that there are laws against threatening someone with violence. In most jurisdictions the offense is assault. Make the threat in public and other factors raise it to felony level Aggraveted Assault.

Actually carrying through with the threat and punching the loudmouth in the nose is Battery. Punch him in the nose in public, bar, restaurant, parking lot and other factors raise it to felony level, Aggravated Battery.

Accept the loudmouth's invitation to fight and you're likely giving up any claim to self defense. The law views it as mutual combat and both parties can be (and often are) charged.

Which brings us up to the OPs point, any fight you engage in can and often does end in serious injury or even death even if that isn't what was intended.


BLACKHAWKNJ said:
No pat answer. I always thought letting hotheads, bullies, the inconsiderate get away with only encourages them.
Click to expand...
Society has decided that you and I aren't empowered to stop them from "getting away with it" except under very specific circumstances. That power rests with the police and the courts. It doesn't matter that the police and the courts are most often ineffective in stopping them from "getting away with it". You have to balance the satisfaction you get from not letting them getting away with it with the potential legal (criminal and civil) and financial costs of stopping them.
 
old lady new shooter said:
What percentage of men can kill another man with a single punch? Are there any women who have this ability?
Click to expand...
100% of men and women are capable of killing with a single punch. It's not so much about strength as it is about where you hit the person. We are not all built the same. The best way to describe it is that hands and feet are less lethal than other things one might use.
 
old lady new shooter said:
What percentage of men can kill another man with a single punch? Are there any women who have this ability?
Click to expand...
What generally happens- and it was the case here- that the person struck falls and hits there head resulting in a cranial or epidural hematoma, colloquially a brain bleed. IIRC this is also how Sonny Bono and Natasha Richardson died after skiing into trees. It's not common nor is it super rare, but it's one of the many things that can happen to a human body when it's subjected to trauma.
 
armoredman said:
De-escalation is VERY important to avoid a lot of paperwork, or potential jail time and huge court battles.
Click to expand...
"Paperwork" is the lowest on my priority list.

Did you mean to leave out death or serious injury?
armoredman said:
Also learn what to do if de-escalation fails.
Click to expand...
From what we know about the incident, parking somewhere else would likely have been best.
 
armoredman said:
De-escalation is VERY important to avoid a lot of paperwork, or potential jail time and huge court battles.
Click to expand...

...and avoid escalating conflicts in general. Active listening works like a charm with Mrs. Morris but there are a number of strategies that are effective, when it comes to avoiding battle.
 
.38 Special said:
Ayoob's In the Gravest Extreme contains a passage in which he suggests carrying a twenty dollar bill wrapped around some object heavy enough to allow tossing across a barroom. The basic idea is to "buy off" a potential adversary in order to avoid a fight, and also to persuade a jury that you really did do everything you could have done beforehand.

I wasn't completely convinced, but as the decades pass I begin to suspect it is a peak of wisdom.

Here in 2025, it is entirely possible that even the slightest bit of physical violence will result in ruinous legal action. My personal plan is to do everything I possibly can to avoid such stuff, even at the price of my own ego. When there is no other option, of course, then violence should be immediate and overwhelming, but it truly should be the option for when you are utterly out of options.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is one of Ayoobs better ideas. If I have to resort to wrapping money around weighted objects I'm definitely in the wrong place.

However I agree that any sort of violence these days can have unforseen consequences. Avoidance and verbal deescalation is always the best way but if that doesn't work I want to win with doing the least amount of damage.

This is why jujitsu can be gold. A controlled takedown to a dominant position where you can maintain both control and situational awareness while using deescalating communication with both the subject and bystanders all while being in a position where you can quickly disengage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Why I Think Open Carry Isn't Wiser than Concealed Carry (In Most Instances/For Most People)
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
157
Views
6K
Kleanbore
K
1
  • Locked
Open Carry: Positive encounter w/ Mpls PD
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
KAR120C
K
R
  • Locked
My Gunfight - "Thinking Outside Your Box"
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
Fred Fuller
F
F
  • Locked
Can You Access Your Training When You Need It?
Replies
3
Views
340
mortablunt
M
M
  • Locked
Shooting @ Universal Studios Orlando Horror nights
Replies
12
Views
1K
knuckles
K
Back
Top