CTsupra;1396677 said:
Had the OP got out of his car to shoot and kill the person making the threats along with saying nothing to the police and letting himself get arrested and through the system, I would think the DA at his trial would at least make the argument that he was in a place of saftey (car) that would allow him to flee and avoid the situation completely. I really think a person in that situation would have a hard time convincing a jury otherwise after what the DA will throw at them.
Honestly playing hypotheticals like that is a fools errand. A lot depends on the situation, the local laws, etc.
It also depends on where you live, in Kalifornia or the People's Socialist Republic of Illinois or the New York Police Protection District, you probably wouldn't have a (legal) gun to begin with.
With all that said, many states have a
Castle Doctrine or "stand your ground laws". It extends effectively to your vehicle and place of business in most jurisdictions. Believe it or not, Kalifornia has one too, but it's so weak it's practically useless. In some jurisdictions it extends EVERYWHERE. For example, where I live, I have
no duty to retreat whatsoever:
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/fulltext/sb396.htm
Simply put, if you live in a liberal cesspool, you right to self defense isn't fully recognized (or recognized at all in a few places) anyway, and you're likely fucked no matter what you do. (If you live in one of these places, you really should pack your shit and go elsewhere...)
In places where the state still recognizes the inalienable rights of it's citizens to defend themselves, you're probably in pretty good shape.
(I'm not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice, standard disclaimers apply, yadda, yadda, yadda.)
The moral of the story - don't use force against other people unless you want retaliation in kind. If you slide a car sideways across a highway (reckless endangerment) jump out of the car an threaten people (assault), there's a good chance someone will take you seriously. In my home state it will get you killed.
Presented with the original case; "Person slides a car sideways on a highway to block the road and gets out and starts threatening me" - in that case, I'd certainly feel threatened. You're not dealing with the actions of a sane individual. Someone who acts like that is unhinged. I wouldn't let him within 10 feet of me, and the law supports me in that.
Poodles;1396184 said:
Never fire a weapon into the air, you have no idea where it's going to land...
Ayup. If you've threatened me to the point where I've drawn a weapon, you get no warnings. I'm certainly not going to endanger innocent lives to warn your guilty ass...
Poodles;1396184 said:
Some asshole like that would back down the second he sees a gun pointed at him. If he didn't, well, he'd be dead, and part of the darwin awards...
And provided he backpedaled the second he saw the gun, he might live through it. Shooting someone who is running away
is murder, I won't argue that.
supraduper;1396267 said:
i just interpreted what you said... that the situation could be easily resolved with a gunshot.. yes, it would have resolved that situation.. but dont forget the explaining to the cops that you shot a guy b/c he got out of his car, albeit that maybe his intention was to harm you... but a guy with 2 fists is no match for a guy with 1 gun... and any officer, i believe, would feel the same way...
Read my replies above re: Castle Doctrine. The laws in my state (or any state I'm wiling to live in) don't support your interpretation. I won't live in a state that doesn't recognize my right to self defense. It's one of the primary reasons I left New York, and I will never return there.
supraduper;1396267 said:
but if i did have a gun and someone approached me in a threatening manner.. i likely, would not shoot to kill. i would shoot the fuckers knees out.. that way he would never forget the guy he fucked with.. i think losing your knees would be a good enough lesson... as you dont know what he's dealing with on a personal level... maybe he found out his wife of 20 years cheated on him with their youngest son... lol... sorry for the graphic nature of my analogy.. but if he was normally a nice guy... hes now dead, and many people are sad because of it..
You wouldn't consider him a nice guy after the lawsuits. You've got a very naive view of this.
(I'm not even going to talk about how damned near impossible it would be to hit a kneecap on a moving target... Watch less television, it's rotting your brain. )
supraduper;1396267 said:
maybe im too sympathetic, or empathetic.. but its my view
You're entitled to it. However I'd advise you to never own a gun if you can't shoot to kill.
foreverpsycotic;1396515 said:
Do not point a gun at someone if your intent is not to kill them.
Exactly. Anyone "brandishing" a gun is asking to get shot.
Kai;1396687 said:
Assinine Kai. You pull your gun loaded with blanks, he puts two hollow points in your head. His defense? You pulled a gun on him.
An unloaded gun (or a gun that isn't being used properly) is an invitation for disaster.