Thinking About Defense of Others

[bblhd672]

In my opinion, no jury in Texas is going to convict you for walking past a 30.06 sign to save someone's life who is under active attack. You should be covered under a defense of necessity.

Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer, but I just don't see it happening.

This attorney agrees with both of your points. I'll also add that I cannot imagine any LEO filing trespass charges under the OP's hypothetical, nor can I imagine a DA accepting charges.

Chas.

I agree with you regarding the LEO's not filing a charge, but when it comes to DA's I think of people like Ronnie Earl and I wouldn't be so sure.

Not to make light of a anti-Constitutional DA filing charges, but in the scope of the scenario described, being charged with a Class C misdemeanor and fined maximum $200 is not a huge concern if I am forced to pass a 30.06/30.07 sign in a legally correct defense of another person.

[mojo84]

In my opinion, no jury in Texas is going to convict you for walking past a 30.06 sign to save someone's life who is under active attack. You should be covered under a defense of necessity.

Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer, but I just don't see it happening.

This attorney agrees with both of your points. I'll also add that I cannot imagine any LEO filing trespass charges under the OP's hypothetical, nor can I imagine a DA accepting charges.

Chas.

I agree with you regarding the LEO's not filing a charge, but when it comes to DA's I think of people like Ronnie Earl and I wouldn't be so sure.

Not to make light of a anti-Constitutional DA filing charges, but in the scope of the scenario described, being charged with a Class C misdemeanor and fined maximum $200 is not a huge concern if I am forced to pass a 30.06/30.07 sign in a legally correct defense of another person.

I'd gladly pay $200 in order to save someone's life. Life is precious.

[Soccerdad1995]

There are too many "what-if" situations to cover everything, so I will keep it short and sweet: I got my CHL/LTC to protect myself and my family. If my family is in danger, then yes, I'm going to anything and everything to protect them. Friends or people I don't know, unless I'm directly involved like I'm inside a 7-11 while being held up, then sorry, I'm not a hero or batman. I will be the best witness I can from a safe place. YMMV

For me it comes down to the following as to whether I would get involved:

Protecting myself or my family from harm = Definitely

Protecting others from harm = Maybe

Protecting my property from theft or destruction = Maybe

Protecting other's property from theft or destruction = No way

[rotor]

Apparently Kay's Jewelers doesn't care if you are able to protect yourself as they are 30.06/07. There were two good samaritans, one is no longer with us. One took down a BG. I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid. The second guy was armed and at least had a way to help end this robbery-murder. Being at home safe and sound with my family sounds better than being a dead good samaritan. I would sleep just fine.

[OldCurlyWolf]

I've already responded to the legal issues, but I want to add this as well. I give my "mall example" in all of my LTC classes. We talk about the natural instinct of many people to help those in danger and the risk this entails when you 1) don't know the people involved; and 2) didn't see the events from the beginning. I also point out that some circumstances are not the least bit vague where coming to the aid of another would create little if any potential legal problems. The physical threat presented will depend upon many factors, not the least of which is your skill at arms and the gun you are carrying.

Getting involved in the troubles of others is a personal decision. There are two things that would keep me awake at night and deprive me of many hours of sleep.

• 1. Taking a life unnecessarily; and
  2. Watching an innocent victim die because I didn't want to get involved.

Chas.

Your list is my list.

More especially since my reflexes are still that of a trained LEO. I found that out about 15 years ago when working in Irving. I heard gunfire and went TOWARD it instead of away or waiting in position.

I would tend to "come to the aid" sooner/more often than the regular person with a LTC.

[bblhd672]

I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid.

There's no reason to suspect he was not armed, he was a law abiding citizen who was not carrying a handgun inside a 30.06/30.07 posted location.
There's also no reason to demean a former U.S. Marine because he chose to be something other than a sheep when facing armed criminals.

[mojo84]

Apparently Kay's Jewelers doesn't care if you are able to protect yourself as they are 30.06/07. There were two good samaritans, one is no longer with us. One took down a BG. I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid. The second guy was armed and at least had a way to help end this robbery-murder. Being at home safe and sound with my family sounds better than being a dead good samaritan. I would sleep just fine.

Was this guy "stupid"? http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/05/r ... y-7-eleven

or this one? http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43249972/ns/u ... IY65BsrLDc

or these? https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/good-g ... date-data/

I would call them heros.

[rotor]

I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid.

There's no reason to suspect he was not armed, he was a law abiding citizen who was not carrying a handgun inside a 30.06/30.07 posted location.
There's also no reason to demean a former U.S. Marine because he chose to be something other than a sheep when facing armed criminals.

By all reports I saw he was not armed. Having served 8 years in the military I am not demeaning anyone on the basis of their military experience. To die protecting Kay Jewelry property is not my idea of smart and now his wife and children don't have a husband/father. I would rather be alive than a dead hero. He was not protecting lives, he was protecting property from a store that posts "we will not let you protect yourself". I do not consider myself a coward for that stance. Dying to protect Kay Jewelry property is not warranted.

[rotor]

Apparently Kay's Jewelers doesn't care if you are able to protect yourself as they are 30.06/07. There were two good samaritans, one is no longer with us. One took down a BG. I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid. The second guy was armed and at least had a way to help end this robbery-murder. Being at home safe and sound with my family sounds better than being a dead good samaritan. I would sleep just fine.

Was this guy "stupid"? http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/05/r ... y-7-eleven

or this one? http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43249972/ns/u ... IY65BsrLDc

or these? https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/good-g ... date-data/

I would call them heros.

I did not check all of your references but I am sure those men are heroes. The issue is whether protection of Kay Jewelry property is reason to be a dead hero. Kay Jewelers does not allow you to protect yourself in their stores so why should I die protecting their jewelry from being stolen? Would a person that can't swim dive into a lake and try to save a drowning victim? Perhaps, but would it be smart? The guy died trying to protect someone's property. Not his property. He is a hero and two weeks from now when his family don't have their husband/father nobody will care and Kay Jewelers wont care either.

[mojo84]

I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid.

There's no reason to suspect he was not armed, he was a law abiding citizen who was not carrying a handgun inside a 30.06/30.07 posted location.
There's also no reason to demean a former U.S. Marine because he chose to be something other than a sheep when facing armed criminals.

By all reports I saw he was not armed. Having served 8 years in the military I am not demeaning anyone on the basis of their military experience. To die protecting Kay Jewelry property is not my idea of smart and now his wife and children don't have a husband/father. I would rather be alive than a dead hero. He was not protecting lives, he was protecting property from a store that posts "we will not let you protect yourself". I do not consider myself a coward for that stance. Dying to protect Kay Jewelry property is not warranted.

How do you know he was not protecting lives?

I saw a report his wife was with him. How do you know he didn't step in to protect her?

How does one know that robbers are not going to shoot potential witnesses once they get the good they want to steal?

[mojo84]

Apparently Kay's Jewelers doesn't care if you are able to protect yourself as they are 30.06/07. There were two good samaritans, one is no longer with us. One took down a BG. I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid. The second guy was armed and at least had a way to help end this robbery-murder. Being at home safe and sound with my family sounds better than being a dead good samaritan. I would sleep just fine.

Was this guy "stupid"? http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/05/r ... y-7-eleven

or this one? http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43249972/ns/u ... IY65BsrLDc

or these? https://www.thetrace.org/2015/08/good-g ... date-data/

I would call them heros.

I did not check all of your references but I am sure those men are heroes. The issue is whether protection of Kay Jewelry property is reason to be a dead hero. Kay Jewelers does not allow you to protect yourself in their stores so why should I die protecting their jewelry from being stolen? Would a person that can't swim dive into a lake and try to save a drowning victim? Perhaps, but would it be smart? The guy died trying to protect someone's property. Not his property. He is a hero and two weeks from now when his family don't have their husband/father nobody will care and Kay Jewelers wont care either.

Interesting how some are willing to ignore or not read factual info and chose to make assumptions to criticize someone. This pattern is evident in the Dick's asking about citizenship thread. Pretty disappointing.

[rotor]

I suspect that the first good samaritan was not armed and although brave was stupid.

There's no reason to suspect he was not armed, he was a law abiding citizen who was not carrying a handgun inside a 30.06/30.07 posted location.
There's also no reason to demean a former U.S. Marine because he chose to be something other than a sheep when facing armed criminals.

By all reports I saw he was not armed. Having served 8 years in the military I am not demeaning anyone on the basis of their military experience. To die protecting Kay Jewelry property is not my idea of smart and now his wife and children don't have a husband/father. I would rather be alive than a dead hero. He was not protecting lives, he was protecting property from a store that posts "we will not let you protect yourself". I do not consider myself a coward for that stance. Dying to protect Kay Jewelry property is not warranted.

How do you know he was not protecting lives?

I saw a report his wife was with him. How do you know he didn't step in to protect her?

How does one know that robbers are not going to shoot potential witnesses once they get the good they want to steal?

How do you know? I don't. If he was protecting his family God bless him for doing everything he could. If that's the case you are right. Usually they don't report that as a good samaritan though. I wish it would have turned out that both BG were in the morgue.

[bblhd672]

By all reports I saw he was not armed. Having served 8 years in the military I am not demeaning anyone on the basis of their military experience. To die protecting Kay Jewelry property is not my idea of smart and now his wife and children don't have a husband/father. I would rather be alive than a dead hero. He was not protecting lives, he was protecting property from a store that posts "we will not let you protect yourself". I do not consider myself a coward for that stance. Dying to protect Kay Jewelry property is not warranted.

Then perhaps you should choose your words more carefully when referring to someone who acted differently than you would?

Without the full release of exactly what transpired why cast judgement on the dead man's actions? Maybe the robber pointed his gun at the man's wife and threatened to shoot her?

[apostate]

How do you know he was a Samaritan? Maybe he was a Christian.

[mojo84]

How do you know he was a Samaritan? Maybe he was a Christian.

What's the purpose in going there?