Search found 1 match

by DEB
Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:04 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Two riot situations not yet addressed
Replies: 25
Views: 20013

Re: Two riot situations not yet addressed

I have thought about this for some time. Currently, as I understand it, one cannot employ lethal force on rioters, unless they are hands on with you and they also really are striking you. In other words, currently, riots are treated the same as if you are accosted by only one person, when if fact they are much more dangerous, even with the disparity of force rules. With one person, perhaps I can talk my way out of it, riots not so much. With one person, I can accept verbal abuse and walk away, with riots, it is mob thought. Who remembers the LA riots? That trucker being drug out of his truck. Currently, as I understand it, he couldn't use lethal force, until they started hitting him, same as riots in the cities now. I submit, it is way to late once the rioters decide you are a target to pummel to death, more recently like that guy in Portland, who tried to save another person. If he would have drew a firearm prior to be actually attacked, he would have been arrested or the rioters could have responded with lethal force, as I see it, without fear from L.E. Very convoluted and confusing. Laws need changed, rioters/multiple folks hindering you from your travels, needs to be addressed by the law as deadly force, IMO. Not because I disagree with their 1st Amendment rights, but because protesters, become rioters at a drop of a hat. Waiting to see if a mob, while they are smashing your vehicle, shouting at you, to see if they really intend to mean you personal harm, seems to me to not be right.
Once a mob acts, it is over for you, even if you are even able to draw a weapon, too many to keep away from you. If you are able to respond earlier, then they wash around you and your survival chances increase. This at least what I have observed from previous individual's actions.
I will do all I can to stay away from anyplace protests take place, but even that isn't right. I shouldn't be punished by the law on my freedom of movement either. I know one can parse this closely, stating that if you feel your life is in danger and etc. Reality is, if you respond to political rioters, where they are protected by a certain political party, you will go to jail, you will be held over for trial, you will be destroyed by those current politics. I personally can't afford that. So, is it, "In for a penny, In for a pound"?
My thoughts only. Even speaking openly on a forum such as this could cause one trouble/loss of job, especially if you are on the other side politically, or work for the Government. Both of which I meet. Whew pretty wordy huh.

Return to “Two riot situations not yet addressed”