Being afraid not justifying self defense shooting

[vito]

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/01/28/pittsburgh-murder-conviction-illustrates-hammer/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl.

This seems a bit scary. Seeing an enraged man approaching you in a vehicle, with a belt wrapped around his fist, seems like a pretty reasonable situation to be in fear for your life. Despite what the linked article says, maybe the enraged individual did not intend to limit himself to giving a "butt whupping". Maybe the shooter had some personal medical issues for which even a moderate beating could be possibly fatal. I'm hoping there is more to this case than what is explained here, because personally, as a 74 year old with heart disease, only one kidney and a few other problems, I do not intend EVER to willingly subject myself to a "butt whupping" which might in fact be a fatal beating.

Being somewhat safe inside the vehicle, I'm not sure I would have fired my concealed firearm, but had the attacker broken the car's window, or be in the process of attempting to do so, I would not wait until after I have been struck, potentially keeping me from further defending myself, before firing my gun in self defense.

 

[Ka6otm]

Why isn't that valid?

Police use that argument all the time. A Mesa SWAT officer got exonerated a few weeks ago using just that defense. He said he thought the guy he killed might have had a gun and he feared for his life.

If it's good for the cops, it's good for us. We don't have two sets of laws in this country, one for the elite and one for the commoners.

 

[GP100]

Why isn't that valid?

Police use that argument all the time. A Mesa SWAT officer got exonerated a few weeks ago using just that defense. He said he thought the guy he killed might have had a gun and he feared for his life.

If it's good for the cops, it's good for us. We don't have two sets of laws in this country, one for the elite and one for the commoners.

But that is exactly what we have in this country.. A cop wouldn't be held to the same standard you and me are..

 

[pisgah]

The "reasonable man" doctrine, upon which self defense is based in this country, demands that a reasonable person in the same circumstance would believe that his life was in imminent danger -- not just that you were frightened. You're in a closed car and an angry guy with a belt approaches? Come on! He drove off after he killed the guy -- he could and should have driven off before.

 

[GunnyGene]

I wouldn't have pulled my belt off, since that would mean my pistol and knife would hit the ground. Probably my trousers to. Then I'd be standing there unarmed with my wackadoodle hanging out while the guy drove off laughing. :roll: :lol:

 

[blume357]

Sounds like a bad call to me... but in most states you don't have to be in fear of your life to use deadly force... fear of great bodily harm is enough....

 

[bogus bill]

I believe in self defense especially since I now am almost 77 years old, fat and out of shape, heart stents etc. In my youth I was about 6`2"s, 260 lbs and a lot of it muscle. I was in many fights growing up.
I think just having a gun on me or nearby possibly saved my butt at least three times even without the other people involved knowing I had one. Two of those events were against two and once with a group of outlaw 1% bikers. Just having a gun handy gave me the confidence or edge to get out of those bad situations without them even knowing I was armed. Else I may not have had the nerve to come out okay. Real bad guys can smell confidence or fear more than most people would think. I was a armed guard over 35 years and those events weren't on the job.
That said I am going to play the devils (or liberals) advocate here. Us right wing gun nuts here talk about it all the time for us. What about our young teen age kids? I am here to tell you that countless times when I was growing up had I had a gun on me and shot other attackers using adults standards of "self defense" I would have probably killed more people than they say Billy the kid did!
I was jumped by over two teenagers at a time more times than I can remember, or care to!
In my case I was a huge fat kid going to school with all the kids in my class usually two years older than me. During world war two my mother had me start first grade at 4 1/2 years old! She ran a country general store by herself and pulled it off to have me babysat I guess . I had a chip on my shoulder all the way through school and was tried out it seemed daily. I wouldn't wish those days on anyone.
I guess that's why there are trials and jury's. It can be a fine line.

 

[Dan in MI]

The "reasonable man" doctrine, upon which self defense is based in this country, demands that a reasonable person in the same circumstance would believe that his life was in imminent danger -- not just that you were frightened. You're in a closed car and an angry guy with a belt approaches? Come on! He drove off after he killed the guy -- he could and should have driven off before.

Agreed, but some people just don't think under pressure. Like the cop that sued a car company for a stuck throttle. Claims he wore out the brakes running at 70+ mph the whole time. Really? Turn the key off.


Many years ago I had to let a guy go at work. I didn't know it but he hung around. When I got into a car in the parking lot he piled in through door trying to start beating me. I had already started the car so a quick jam into reverse and stomp on the pedal removed him quickly and took the wind out of his sails.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

The "reasonable man" doctrine, upon which self defense is based in this country, demands that a reasonable person in the same circumstance would believe that his life was in imminent danger -- not just that you were frightened. You're in a closed car and an angry guy with a belt approaches? Come on! He drove off after he killed the guy -- he could and should have driven off before.

I like this. The "reasonable man" doctrine asks several additional questions.
What was the guys intent?
Was the guy close enough to actually commit this act?
Did you have an opportunity to get away?
Did he have the where with all to commit the crime? a belt wrapped around his hand isn't really considered something that always brings death.

Certainly there is a difference between being afraid, and being afraid for your life. Is it reasonable to fear for your life if the guy can't even reach out and touch you, or you aren't in the same proximity to the man when you are in the car and he can't even rush out and touch the car? Can you get away either by going around him, or can you back up and turn around and get away. Are your doors locked? How is he going to get in?

The man that did the shooting may have been afraid or he may have been coached to say that. But being afraid is not the standard. Is your fear rational given the above questions. Reasonable people are all going to ask the same questions.

 

[Pat-inCO]

.. A cop wouldn't be held to the same standard you and me are..

You are absolutely correct.
They are held to a much higher standard.

BUT, they have an advantage that we do not.
They can legally command a mope to the ground, where we can not.

 

[Ray Newman]

Believe there is more to this. From the earlier news articles linked in the OP's original link:

"Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge David R. Cashman wondered who he was about to sentence:

"Derek Vasos, a loving father who had no criminal history. worked as a medical device salesman and was known to perform random acts of kindness for strangers?

"Or Derek Vasos, the man who knowingly carried a loaded gun into a bar, got drunk, and then shot an unarmed man from inside an Uber?" (emphasis added: RCN)

Read all 'bout it:
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2018/01/25/Derek-Vasos-Pittsburgh-homicide-Uber-gun-Allegheny-County-Donald-Ketter-sentence-prison/stories/201801250111

Also:

"A Carrick man who was riding in an Uber fired a shot and killed a man outside a club in the neighborhood early Sunday, Pittsburgh police said.

"Derek Vasos, 37, was arraigned this morning on charges of homicide, intimidating a witness and making threats in the shooting death of 28-year-old Donald Ketter Jr.

"Pittsburgh police arrested Mr. Vasos after they spoke to three witnesses, including an Uber driver who picked him up early that morning."

Read all 'bout it:
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2017/02/06/Police-say-Carrick-man-fatally-shot-victim-from-inside-an-Uber-pittsburgh/stories/201702060141

 

[mohavesam]

.. A cop wouldn't be held to the same standard you and me are..

You are absolutely correct.
They are held to a much higher standard.

BUT, they have an advantage that we do not.
They can legally command a mope to the ground, where we can not.

-- Their "higher standard" is myth. A LEO however, has free legal defense, free investigation using professional detectives, and the benefit of the doubt in public forum (media). And the courts have ruled that any LEO cannot testify on the defendant's behalf (includes detectives investigating the case, etc).

-- This simply means you have to have an attorney willing to dice up the officer's testimony. and you have to pay them (with your family's savings).

Also - "They can legally command a mope to the ground, where we can not." is not true in this state. Citizens have the same powers of arrest, disarming, and detainment as any badged civil servant. Black letter law. :wink:

 

[gramps]

Mr Vasos, was in a protected environment, that was whole and intact. If he was afraid for his life he should have told the Uber driver to GO!
gramps

 

[Ka6otm]

.. A cop wouldn't be held to the same standard you and me are..

You are absolutely correct.
They are held to a much higher standard.

BUT, they have an advantage that we do not.
They can legally command a mope to the ground, where we can not.

Not around here. Reference my post to the Mesa Az cop above.

How far do you think you'd get in a self defense shooting if you said you thought the other guy had a gun and it turns out he didn't? At that point it becomes at the very least manslaughter.

And in this case, there was nothing visually indicating that there might have been a gun.

 

[Paul B]

"I believe in self defense especially since I now am almost 77 years old, fat and out of shape,"

Yeah. me too. I'm exactly seven months shy of my eight decade, two bad knees, bad back and would be in serious trouble if some dude confronted me with what appeared to be a weapon. Already had that happen maybe twenty years ago now. Idiot brought a club to a gunfight. Case of mistaken identity. He though I was an ex-Mayor of Tucson that had done him wrong. Took some serious yelling and a 9MM to convince him he had the wrong guy. Had over a half dozen witnessed to the whole thing and five will get you ten that if I'd had to shoot, they all would have left Dodge ASAP.
I try to not aggravate people, especially strangers but there's still an awful lot of loony tunes out there.
Paul B.

 

[GunnyGene]

"I believe in self defense especially since I now am almost 77 years old, fat and out of shape,"

Yeah. me too. I'm exactly seven months shy of my eight decade, two bad knees, bad back and would be in serious trouble if some dude confronted me with what appeared to be a weapon. Already had that happen maybe twenty years ago now. Idiot brought a club to a gunfight. Case of mistaken identity. He though I was an ex-Mayor of Tucson that had done him wrong. Took some serious yelling and a 9MM to convince him he had the wrong guy. Had over a half dozen witnessed to the whole thing and five will get you ten that if I'd had to shoot, they all would have left Dodge ASAP.
I try to not aggravate people, especially strangers but there's still an awful lot of loony tunes out there.
Paul B.

A large part of this kind of encounter is what you said - mistaken id, etc., but also on our part having to make the right decision within a very short time frame - fractions of a second sometimes, and the wrong decision can get you killed or jailed, and many people who have little to no experience with such encounters will make the wrong decision. Tough call in any case.

 

[Conservative]

If I'm in an obvious self-defense situation, i.e., say a guy/gal is running directly at me, knife at high stabbing posture, I won't be worrying about 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin' type thinking.

I'll be going into self defense mode.

Prank?

You say it was just a prank?

How would I know that?

That level of so-called 'pranking' ends up with 'the prankster' at the funeral home in my part of the world...

 

[SR1911SHOOTER]

Vito,
At 83, I feel like you, I will not submit to a beating from some thug.
If the law wants to put me away for killing a thug they have to support me,
provide medical, dental and all that implies. They can go for it.
Blackie

 

[bogus bill]

Fifty five years ago I was a foreman on a rough job that took me all over the states maybe a month or two at each job. It was dirty hard work that involved digging around old utility poles to treat for ground line decay. The guys I hired had to work for minimum wages. Through one of my guys I met another guy that turned out to be bad news. I somehow ended up with his girlfriend. I had to fire his pal on something. Now both hated me. I got a third party tip they were out to "get me". By that time I had been around both long enough to know they had pulled other stuff and should be in jail. They were the real deal. Prior to all this both had been in my apartment plus we had been out shooting. I had a cheap one bedroom studio type apartment over a store. They knew I had a handgun but didn't know I also had a pump 12. I expected them. I unloaded my revolver, set it in plain view on top a dresser. The loaded shotgun, I set behind a opened closet door, between it and the wall. I came in and was on the throne. I thought I heard some slight noise and came out. Both were there holding 24 oz empty coke bottles fixing on working me over. They had came up the fire escape and carded their way in. I was big and strong back then but the ex boy friend also was about 6ft 4" and maybe a few years older. The other was a smaller weasel but in good shape. I figured my best tacit was to make one of them mad enough to go for my revolver on the dresser. The smaller one did swing once or twice at me but I was able to jab him off while I worked my way back to the closet door. The ex boyfriend was more experienced and sensed I must have something going for me and backed off. We had a short 30 second talk and they left. They never seen the shotgun. Thats what I meant when I wrote on the prior post that just having a gun can give you the confidence you need to sometime get you out of a bad situation. Turned out that girl followed me to the other side of the country and gave me trouble there too. She was something!

 

[kmoore]

Like all short stories, not enough information to judge right or wrong self defense.
You must ask yourself. Was this guy able to cause the shooter serious bodily harm or death when he was shot? Maybe, maybe not. The court thought not.
Did the bad guy have the MEANS to harm/cause death? when he was shot. Maybe not standing outside the vehicle. If he had hit the window, broke the window, swung his fist then maybe. If they two were standing facing each on the sidewalk then maybe even likely. I think the article said the shooter lowered the window.

OPPORTUNITY did the bad guy have the opportunity, Yeah maybe. Maybe not the BG was outside the vehicle the shooter was inside, maybe the door was locked maybe not. But could the vehicle could just drive away and leave the fool standing with a belt around his hand.
INTENT the BG showed intent by standing in front of the vehicle, wrapping his hand with a belt. Did he say anything? Like I am going the give you a soft punch in your face and leave or I am going to kill you. Or nothing at all. When he moved out of the way of the vehicle and approached, he could be showing intent. Intent can be by action and or verbal.