It's a toss up, but I believe I'd rather take the chance of being arrested than the chance of being kicked in the head and maimed or killed.
YMMV.
YMMV.
Last edited:
What Would You Do?
- Thread starter JackBull
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
- Status
I'm sorry, if someone has attacked you, from behind, knocked you to the ground and is fixing to attack you further and you we're already at a disadvantage due to your age and physical condition then I would have not only drawn my weapon but I would have put several rounds in the person and if the police arrest me that is fine..... hopefully there are witnesses.... but if not then there is one... Me.
I know there are many stories of people presenting a weapon that that stops the threat, but I sill fall back on what my father taught me (and he had seen the tiger). "you never point your gun at a live person". His belief was you only draw and fire you don't threaten with a gun and before you draw you have already determined that the object you are going to shoot is dead and destroyed.
I know there are many stories of people presenting a weapon that that stops the threat, but I sill fall back on what my father taught me (and he had seen the tiger). "you never point your gun at a live person". His belief was you only draw and fire you don't threaten with a gun and before you draw you have already determined that the object you are going to shoot is dead and destroyed.
In NC the phrase from the "Red Book" is "threat of death, great bodily harm or sexual assault". "great bodily harm" = "prolonged hospital stay or life threatening injuries". The blow to the back/head = "threat of death or great bodily harm". Since the victim managed to escape, I would have been down at the local magistrates office the next morning swearing out a warrant for assault. (BTW, I had a confrontation with an individual once who was prowling around a single lady's house, three days later on Sunday, in a grocery store, the individual stalked up behind be and started communicating threats again.) Monday morning, I sashayed down to the magistrate's office and swore out a warrant for communicating threats, a trial ensued whereby he had to explain to a judge his position. It did not go well for him.
TINCANBANDIT is back
Single-Sixer
maybe I am wrong but attacking someone from behind shows malice (and cowardice IMO). I would have pulled my weapon to prevent the attack from continuing.
If he had connections to a corrupt police force and calling the police would do no good, then I would take my case to the neighbors, have a meeting and let them know who is living amongst them.....in the old days they would tie him to a rail and take him out of town for a good tar and feathering.....perhaps we need to return to these tactics to keep the "entitled" from getting away with crimes.
If he had connections to a corrupt police force and calling the police would do no good, then I would take my case to the neighbors, have a meeting and let them know who is living amongst them.....in the old days they would tie him to a rail and take him out of town for a good tar and feathering.....perhaps we need to return to these tactics to keep the "entitled" from getting away with crimes.
Do you have a link, or can you give me enough information to find the story? Not being difficult or argumentative. I would like to read it though. I might learn something.
I wouldn't care if he knew Joe Biden. If I were hit from behind and knocked down I and was able I would have drawn my gun and if he were still aggressive I would have used it here in Fl. When in NY I would have clasped my hands together and Prayed there thet don't have a stand your ground law, you are required to retreat probably even if you have to crawl away.
Last edited:
Figure out how your dog is getting in his yard, I've had fairly big dogs in the 40 years I've lived here and no problems at all! But then, the second year I lived here I put a 6 foot tall privacy fence up! I know where my dogs are all the time. I put up my third fence (original and two replacements) 5 years ago after I retired! Get a tall fenced in backyard or move!
We have a not-so-friendly person who moved in down the street but I don't live next to him. Our first encounter did not go well. Neighbors around him agree, he's not a nice person! In my 71 years, I've lived up on this hill for a total of 56 years and he's the first a**hole I've encountered!
He did assault you IMO. Not sure if the cops would do much good if he and his family are in good with them. Shooting him may or may not have worked out for you! Might be easier to just move! Good luck!!
We have a not-so-friendly person who moved in down the street but I don't live next to him. Our first encounter did not go well. Neighbors around him agree, he's not a nice person! In my 71 years, I've lived up on this hill for a total of 56 years and he's the first a**hole I've encountered!
He did assault you IMO. Not sure if the cops would do much good if he and his family are in good with them. Shooting him may or may not have worked out for you! Might be easier to just move! Good luck!!
Last edited:
Mods.....really - Rosie O'Donnell......LOL!
contender
Ruger Guru
We all can "monday morning quarterback" this scenario.
We were not the victim. We were not there. We may not know all the laws of that State. And we also may not have the ability to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in a criminal defense trial.
That said, even against a person with "connections" etc,, it's wise to do as much as possible to avoid shooting another person. Even if you are armed,, and that person isn't.
Yes,, extenuating circumstances (age, health issues, aggressor bigger, out in a public street, etc) can help defend your side in court. But it's MUCH easier to prove a self defense case if you do as much as possible to avoid a lethal response.
Just like Sam mentioned above,, he had (2) situations where an aggressive type created the problem. No, he wasn't physically attacked,, but he chose to USE the LAW to get this person in trouble. AND,, by doing so,, if that person had chosen to make a 3rd attempt,, AFTER a court found him at fault,, then Sam would have a SOLID history of trying all he could to prevent it, and was forced into a lethal confrontation.
Yes,, the physical attack is a bigger issue.
But going back to my first part,, "we were not there" and I wonder, did the victim of the assault remain totally silent after the dog got into the street? Most humans can not keep their mouth shut. And if the aggressor came out of his house,, swearing etc,, most people would say SOMETHING in response. Yes,, trying to retreat is what should be done. But we have been presented with a side of a story where the victim has only expressed calling the dog, loudly. What else was said or exchanged?
My point is,, we were not there,, and as Paul Harvey used to say; "The rest of the story" is not known here. Remember,, a jury is a 3rd party, and they will be called upon to look at things AFTER the actions, and can only pass judgement based upon facts presented.
I'd prefer to have a lot more facts to back up my side of things if I were on trial for killing anyone.
Personally,, if it had been my dog,, and he came into the street,, I would have gotten him and retreated,, AND not allowing anybody to get behind me. Avoiding the "attack from behind." If I could have,, I would be holding my dog by the collar,, and keeping the dog between myself & the aggressor if possible. And by backing away,, while facing a potential aggressor, I can use that to avoid the physical attack possibly.
Many of y'all may remember,, a few years ago,, I had a guy come out of the woods, come between my truck & my wife's car, and attempt to get in. I had my firearm,, but I didn't shoot the guy. I did as much as I could to stop any potential assault or whatever without shooting him. By that person's actions,, I could have possibly shot him & eventually gotten away with doing so. But not before a serious legal case that could have destroyed my life. (And 2 different cops from 2 different depts said they would have shot him.) Do all you can to avoid the killing of anybody. Make the shooting of someone the very last resort if at all possible.
Small disputes can escalate into a very serious problem quickly. Locally, we had a case in the last week or so,, where a teenager was shot by a landowner. Apparently the teen had parked on the landowner's property, and a dispute happened. The landowner is in jail, facing manslaughter charges.
We as responsible firearm owners need to be as careful, and as calm as possible when faced with the potential for escalation of a problem, and do all we can to NOT shoot someone.
But again,, I wasn't there,, and I do not have enough facts to make a decision one way or another about what the OP has put forth.
We were not the victim. We were not there. We may not know all the laws of that State. And we also may not have the ability to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in a criminal defense trial.
That said, even against a person with "connections" etc,, it's wise to do as much as possible to avoid shooting another person. Even if you are armed,, and that person isn't.
Yes,, extenuating circumstances (age, health issues, aggressor bigger, out in a public street, etc) can help defend your side in court. But it's MUCH easier to prove a self defense case if you do as much as possible to avoid a lethal response.
Just like Sam mentioned above,, he had (2) situations where an aggressive type created the problem. No, he wasn't physically attacked,, but he chose to USE the LAW to get this person in trouble. AND,, by doing so,, if that person had chosen to make a 3rd attempt,, AFTER a court found him at fault,, then Sam would have a SOLID history of trying all he could to prevent it, and was forced into a lethal confrontation.
Yes,, the physical attack is a bigger issue.
But going back to my first part,, "we were not there" and I wonder, did the victim of the assault remain totally silent after the dog got into the street? Most humans can not keep their mouth shut. And if the aggressor came out of his house,, swearing etc,, most people would say SOMETHING in response. Yes,, trying to retreat is what should be done. But we have been presented with a side of a story where the victim has only expressed calling the dog, loudly. What else was said or exchanged?
My point is,, we were not there,, and as Paul Harvey used to say; "The rest of the story" is not known here. Remember,, a jury is a 3rd party, and they will be called upon to look at things AFTER the actions, and can only pass judgement based upon facts presented.
I'd prefer to have a lot more facts to back up my side of things if I were on trial for killing anyone.
Personally,, if it had been my dog,, and he came into the street,, I would have gotten him and retreated,, AND not allowing anybody to get behind me. Avoiding the "attack from behind." If I could have,, I would be holding my dog by the collar,, and keeping the dog between myself & the aggressor if possible. And by backing away,, while facing a potential aggressor, I can use that to avoid the physical attack possibly.
Many of y'all may remember,, a few years ago,, I had a guy come out of the woods, come between my truck & my wife's car, and attempt to get in. I had my firearm,, but I didn't shoot the guy. I did as much as I could to stop any potential assault or whatever without shooting him. By that person's actions,, I could have possibly shot him & eventually gotten away with doing so. But not before a serious legal case that could have destroyed my life. (And 2 different cops from 2 different depts said they would have shot him.) Do all you can to avoid the killing of anybody. Make the shooting of someone the very last resort if at all possible.
Small disputes can escalate into a very serious problem quickly. Locally, we had a case in the last week or so,, where a teenager was shot by a landowner. Apparently the teen had parked on the landowner's property, and a dispute happened. The landowner is in jail, facing manslaughter charges.
We as responsible firearm owners need to be as careful, and as calm as possible when faced with the potential for escalation of a problem, and do all we can to NOT shoot someone.
But again,, I wasn't there,, and I do not have enough facts to make a decision one way or another about what the OP has put forth.
My feeling is that it's a lose-lose situation. If you draw a gun in a suburban or urban area of a liberal state, you ain't getting your gun back and will probably lose your house and then some paying legal fees or you'll be sitting in jail for a few years and lose your "right" to own firearms.
Might not lose so bad if you don't draw, but I doubt there'd be time to contemplate, and you may end up dead.
Might not lose so bad if you don't draw, but I doubt there'd be time to contemplate, and you may end up dead.
Regarding Post #25, from MikeJ. I remembered part or all of the story from the past. I looked it up by doing a search. The title of the thread was "the gunslinger effect" On July 3rd 2022. Post #18 tells about this situation and what happened.
I don't feel your question is anything, but asking for more information. It's there in his words. We can agree or disagree with what should have been done. In this case what was done resulted in an arrest and or court case according to the poster.
I don't feel your question is anything, but asking for more information. It's there in his words. We can agree or disagree with what should have been done. In this case what was done resulted in an arrest and or court case according to the poster.
How? One is an older semi disabled person on the ground completely at the mercy of the attacker. The other is a physically able person perfectly capable of disengaging from the situation.
A 20ga cane wouldn't be Rocket Surgery!This is why I just invented my Full Metal Pimp Stick. Details to follow.
JackBull
Buckeye
That was exactly my thoughts!!!
JackBull
Buckeye
He was just a pup
JackBull
Buckeye
Yes card carrying member.Is that person a union worker or not? Response will be different if or if not.
Busterswoodshop
Buckeye
That makes sense.
Puppies get a pass.
A agree you should be allowed to defend yourself.
BUT, why did you let yourself get into that situation in the first place? Your dog should be under your control at all times when it is off your property. Either on a leash or well enough trained to immediately respond to your commands.
BUT, why did you let yourself get into that situation in the first place? Your dog should be under your control at all times when it is off your property. Either on a leash or well enough trained to immediately respond to your commands.
Lets just back up to your first mistake.
1. If you LOVE your animal, no matter what animal it is, KEEP IT AT HOME.
2. If you ignored that common sense curtesy, then walk to the front door and knock on it. Politely explain the situation to the home/land owner and ASK THEIR PERMISSION to proceed and ask if they have any preference how you may use THEIR PROPERTY and achieve your goal.
3. Probably won't be any need for any of the rest of those consequences of your mistake at point #1.
4. a warning, I wouldn't suggest you get out that gun and start waving it around after dark while trespassing and yelling about some dog.
- Status
