Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Guns are often featured in the news media. Here you can post links to such news items and discuss them.

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:44 pm

bumpylight wrote:Ah, but you forgot to address the law regarding using a non-scoped, .17-caliber sniper rifle from the basket of a hot-air balloon to shoot between three to four rounds but certainly not five or more rounds in rapid succession at a rabid jackal snapping at the flanks of a half-grown kangaroo that has just escaped from a federally subsidized wildlife preserve. What do you have to say about that, huh, huh? :ack:

Personally, I'm inclined to flee wildly from this increasingly silly exhibition of cross-purposed chat. :wink:

althor wrote:[....]

The law allows one to use force in defense of one's own life, or to prevent grave bodily injury to one's self, or in defense of a third party for the same. I said nothing about a fleeing person. You appear to be making multiple claims, and I responded to only one of them... which I thought was clear.


Shooting from and aircraft ??

Another big no-no.

:D
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby bumpylight » Tue 10 Jan 2017 1:03 pm

I believe shooting a fleeing kidnapper to halt the abduction of an individual or individuals held by the kidnapper would be considered a justifiable escalation to deadly force in most states. For that matter, I believe Texas law contains language covering halting the flight of thieves or robbers with deadly force under certain circumstances.

[....]

Texas law also justifies killing to protect others’ property. In 2007, a man told 14 times by a 911 operator to remain inside during a robbery gunned down two thieves fleeing from his neighbor’s house. (“There’s no property worth shooting somebody over, OK?” the operator said on the call. The shooter’s response: “The law has been changed….Here it goes, buddy! You hear the shotgun clickin’ and I’m goin’!”) He was acquitted the next year.

[....]


http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when- ... -in-texas/

Admittedly, Texas appears to be unique in this regard, but all states have their legal quirks. Still, outside of Texas or the special case of abduction, refraining from shooting at a fleeing suspect is undoubtedly an excellent general rule for civilians. I know I'd be extremely reluctant myself in any case to risk the inevitable media firestorm over an otherwise justifiable shooting that resulted in spent bullets or bullet fragments being recovered from the backside of any of the attackers.

Karl wrote:[....] Well this sounds like you think you can shoot someone who is fleeing.

[....]
Last edited by bumpylight on Thu 12 Jan 2017 9:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
bumpylight
Marksman
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue 26 Feb 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby manithree » Tue 10 Jan 2017 1:04 pm

Karl wrote:
althor wrote:
Karl wrote:In the various CFP classes taught all across the USA they always emphasize that you may only shoot in defense of your own life...


In the three classes that I've sat in on, that was not the case. Good thing too, since it is not correct.

Well this sounds like you think you can shoot someone who is fleeing.


No, actually, it doesn't sound like that at all.
It's not about the odds, it's about the stakes.
http://gunfacts.info/
User avatar
manithree
Sniper
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu 30 Jul 2009 12:26 pm
Location: Orem, UT

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Tue 10 Jan 2017 2:53 pm

manithree wrote:
No, actually, it doesn't sound like that at all.

A conclusion such as yours above without any syllogism or facts supporting it is simply verbose, unfortunately.
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby DaKnife » Thu 12 Jan 2017 9:27 am

The quotes:
Karl said:
In the various CFP classes taught all across the USA they always emphasize that you may only shoot in defense of your own life...

Althor replied:
In the three classes that I've sat in on, that was not the case. Good thing too, since it is not correct.


There is nothing in either of those statements about someone running away. Althor is correct, You may also justifiably shoot in defense of other lives and you may also justifiably shoot to protect against severe bodily harm to self or others.

Stop reading imaginary things into what others write. And trying to use big words to back up your non position weakens your credibility even more. Plus Manithree's reply was anything but verbose.
Last edited by DaKnife on Fri 13 Jan 2017 4:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
SPOOOOOOON!!!

WARNING: This comment may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm, in every other state it may increase intelligence and knowledge.
User avatar
DaKnife
Sniper
 
Posts: 2400
Joined: Thu 06 Jan 2011 12:16 pm
Location: Riverdale

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Thu 12 Jan 2017 9:50 am

DaKnife wrote:...

There is nothing in either of those statements about someone running away. Althor is correct, You may also justifiably shoot in defense of other lives and you may also justifiably shoot to protect against severe bodily harm to self or others.

Stop reading imaginary things into what others write. And trying to use big words to back up your non position weakens your credibility even more. Plus Manithree's reply was anything but verbose.


Once again your syllogism fails.

As I reported, the classes including the one I have recently completed all emphasize you must be in fear of your life.

There is no logical way to construe that a fleeing perp is in any way threatening your life.

Stop using illogical thinking.
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby bumpylight » Thu 12 Jan 2017 10:05 am

I'm almost but not quite tempted to drag out a platoon of big words to describe a totally hypothetical situation that has a fleeing suspect heading straight for a huge "Planet of the Apes"-style cobalt bomb with a toggle near a label that reads, "End the world with a simple flick of the wrist." :nilly:

Karl, I know you're trying to participate in the forum, but please take the time to read and understand what other forum participants have actually written before replying to them. Talking at cross purposes promises only fruitless chatter about nothing. :raisedbrow:

In any case, I'll remark that shooting at an apparently fleeing suspect is fraught with legal peril and not to be undertaken without dire need, such as to prevent a kidnapping or to protect the life and safety of others for whom one may be responsible. That position seems noncontroversial enough.
User avatar
bumpylight
Marksman
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue 26 Feb 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby jfwright1955 » Thu 12 Jan 2017 10:45 am

If a perp with the means to inflict serious harm to you has turned away so the immediate threat to you is over but, in doing so, they then advance toward another person with plausible intent and means to cause that person(s) serious injury or worse, of course you are within your legal boundary to use deadly force to stop the threat. Are you obligated to do so? No. Are you within your legal rights here in Utah to do so? Yes.

While I am personally not a lawyer, there is a renowned firearms lawyer here in Utah, who also happens to be a CFP instructor, who covers such plausible scenarios in his CFP class. I should imagine if anyone knows the legality of this it would be him. I would also venture it may be mentioned in one of his books, although I have not looked it up nor verified it. Given he has fought many cases both as a prosecutor and defense attorney, I will take his guidance and insight on the matter.
John
NRA RSO
No one should make decisions for us when it comes to guns and gun carry. If we do things we're not comfortable with because someone told us it's 'right' it becomes a distraction in an event where clarity and simplicity is needed.
User avatar
jfwright1955
Sniper
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun 13 Jan 2013 9:15 am
Location: Marana, AZ

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby althor » Thu 12 Jan 2017 11:39 am

Karl wrote:
DaKnife wrote:...

There is nothing in either of those statements about someone running away. Althor is correct, You may also justifiably shoot in defense of other lives and you may also justifiably shoot to protect against severe bodily harm to self or others.

Stop reading imaginary things into what others write. And trying to use big words to back up your non position weakens your credibility even more. Plus Manithree's reply was anything but verbose.


Once again your syllogism fails.

As I reported, the classes including the one I have recently completed all emphasize you must be in fear of your life.

There is no logical way to construe that a fleeing perp is in any way threatening your life.

Stop using illogical thinking.


Once again, just to be clear. I made NO statement regarding the shooting of a fleeing subject, none whatsoever, period. You appear to be deliberately ignoring that fact.
User avatar
althor
Sharp Shooter
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu 11 Oct 2007 10:50 am
Location: West Jordan

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Thu 12 Jan 2017 3:13 pm

Fair enough -- let's let the issue of the fleeing perp go then.

Next issue ... ?
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby manithree » Thu 12 Jan 2017 5:45 pm

Karl wrote:Fair enough -- let's let the issue of the fleeing perp go then.

Next issue ... ?


According to you, I can't shoot in defense of my wife or children, or to avoid serious bodily harm, or to prevent a forcible felony.

Any CFP instructor who says "you can only shoot in defense of your own life" should be reported to BCI for improperly training. Why do you think your opinion is more important than Utah statute and BCI training materials?
It's not about the odds, it's about the stakes.
http://gunfacts.info/
User avatar
manithree
Sniper
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu 30 Jul 2009 12:26 pm
Location: Orem, UT

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Thu 12 Jan 2017 10:30 pm

manithree wrote:
Karl wrote:Fair enough -- let's let the issue of the fleeing perp go then.

Next issue ... ?


According to you, I can't shoot in defense of my wife or children, or to avoid serious bodily harm, or to prevent a forcible felony.

Any CFP instructor who says "you can only shoot in defense of your own life" should be reported to BCI for improperly training. Why do you think your opinion is more important than Utah statute and BCI training materials?

Where did you get all that ?!
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby manithree » Fri 13 Jan 2017 6:37 am

Karl wrote:
manithre wrote:According to you, I can't shoot in defense of my wife or children, or to avoid serious bodily harm, or to prevent a forcible felony.

Any CFP instructor who says "you can only shoot in defense of your own life" should be reported to BCI for improperly training. Why do you think your opinion is more important than Utah statute and BCI training materials?

Where did you get all that ?!


Really? I directly quote you, and you ask where I get that. You are the one who said:
Karl wrote: ... you may only shoot in defense of your own life.


Are you now denying you said that? Or that you defended it vigorously against all the fact-based assertions that it was incorrect?

Your words clearly state ("ONLY in defense of your OWN life") that I may NOT shoot in the defense of others. That has been pointed out to you repeatedly, and you continue to ignore it. And I expect you will continue to.

You see, some of us know that this board is a place where new gun-owners and carriers will come for information. I believe your opinion that directly contradicts Utah statute is dangerous for current and future new carriers.

So, here's a couple of direct questions for you. Did you make the above statement (trust me, we all know how to scroll back and see it attributed to you)? How do you explain the direct contradiction with Utah statute 76-2-402?
It's not about the odds, it's about the stakes.
http://gunfacts.info/
User avatar
manithree
Sniper
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu 30 Jul 2009 12:26 pm
Location: Orem, UT

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby Karl » Fri 13 Jan 2017 12:23 pm

Are you coming to the open carry dinner at the end of the month?

If so we can talk about this more then.
Karl
Marksman
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu 06 Oct 2016 12:45 pm

Re: Quick-Thinking Cop in April 2016 Walmart Shooting

Postby manithree » Fri 13 Jan 2017 2:22 pm

Karl wrote:Are you coming to the open carry dinner at the end of the month?

If so we can talk about this more then.


Nope.
It's not about the odds, it's about the stakes.
http://gunfacts.info/
User avatar
manithree
Sniper
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Thu 30 Jul 2009 12:26 pm
Location: Orem, UT

PreviousNext

Return to Guns in the News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests