When to get involved as a third person

[lildave40]

When I took my class I was instructed if you see a situation happening the best thing you can do is observe and gather as much factual information you can and contact the leos. Even in additional training this has been repeated to me. If you are not directly involved dont get in the middle. My question is when do you get involved when you see a situation arise? Sorry if this is a dumb question but would like your thoughts.

[suthdj]

When I took my class I was instructed if you see a situation happening the best thing you can do is observe and gather as much factual information you can and contact the leos. Even in additional training this has been repeated to me. If you are not directly involved dont get in the middle. My question is when do you get involved when you see a situation arise? Sorry if this is a dumb question but would like your thoughts.

When your conscience says its the right thing to do. It is an individual choice.

[imkopaka]

It's not within me to observe someone being victimized and do nothing. Even if I go to jail for helping, if I know in my heart that my intervention saved the victim, I can live with that.

[twomillenium]

They way I look at it, getting involved is not a obligation. When to get involved will vary between each individual. I would not get involved just because I see something that I do not like, fair or unfair. I would get involved if I feared for the safety or life of another AND my involvement would help deescalate the situation. It is not a matter of what if, it would be a matter of this is happening now.

There are ways to help out without actual involvement. Just letting the aggressor know that the action is being witnessed or making sure the aggressor knows your presence, will change the direction of the situation without actual involvement.

I consider actual involvement as something that would warrant notification of Law Enforcement. You do not get involved at the level I believe the OP is talking about and then walk away. No matter what you decide, involvement could also mean that you will have to justify your actions to others and have them agree with your justification.

So be careful in your level of involvement, make sure that it is warranted and that you are not just being nosey about what might happen.
Just sayin.

[joe817]

They way I look at it, getting involved is not a obligation. When to get involved will vary between each individual. I would not get involved just because I see something that I do not like, fair or unfair. I would get involved if I feared for the safety or life of another AND my involvement would help deescalate the situation. It is not a matter of what if, it would be a matter of this is happening now.

There are ways to help out without actual involvement. Just letting the aggressor know that the action is being witnessed or making sure the aggressor knows your presence, will change the direction of the situation without actual involvement.

I consider actual involvement as something that would warrant notification of Law Enforcement. You do not get involved at the level I believe the OP is talking about and then walk away. No matter what you decide, involvement could also mean that you will have to justify your actions to others and have them agree with your justification.

So be careful in your level of involvement, make sure that it is warranted and that you are not just being nosey about what might happen.
Just sayin.

Very well put twomillenium. I totally agree, and you expressed yourself much better than I could.

[thetexan]

Of course, the rules say basically that if you were in the place of that third person and as such would be authorized by statute to use force or deadly force then you as a third person may defend that person likewise.

That just means you would then be legally authorized but not compelled to defend. Here are some things to consider when pondering if you meet the legal requirements of third person defense...

1. Did that third person provoke the attacker?
2. Was the third person engaged in any criminal activity at the time of the attack?
3. Is that third person where he has a right to be?
4. Was that third person actually the aggressor who attempted to to commit murder, robbery, sexual assault it any of the big six, which would mean the seeming attacker is actually righteously defending himself?

These are all things that would disqualify you from using force or deadly force.

So the decision is a complex one that has to be made quickly and under pressure.

Choose wisely grasshopper.

tex

[anygunanywhere]

Never get involved unless you also call 911. Have someone else do it if need be, but never go it alone. Calling 911 after the fact might not be to your benefit.

[goose]

There are ways to help out without actual involvement. Just letting the aggressor know that the action is being witnessed or making sure the aggressor knows your presence, will change the direction of the situation without actual involvement.

Very good points, but I have experience with this one. I once, loudly, asked a lady fighting for control of a child if she wanted me to call the police. She heard me; he heard me; she helped me reiterate the information by yelling, "Please call the police!"

It is a longer story than this but in under a minute she had the child back in her car (where I had originally seen the child) and was driving away. I didn't have to make a judgement if it was an abduction or if it was a valid custody issue. All I had to do was offer a call and then step back. Custody or not, abduction or not, I got to see the kid back in the original car and I didn't have to pull my pistol or do any paper work. Clear conscience.

[LSUTiger]

Depends on situation, things to consider:

What is the scenario? Some guy getting beat up by thugs, damsel in distress (most likely to happen and go south) or a gunman shooting up a school?
Who is third person? Man, woman, child, relative, friend or stranger?
What is threat? One or multiple. Animals-attacked by lions,tigers, bears, pitbulls. Humans-armed/unarmed.
Are you capable of helping? Do you have any physical limitations?
Are you alone, with family or with others capable and willing to assist you in helping?
Is there any cover to escape to?
Is it a suicide mission or even though there is risk, are there reasonable chances of successful outcome or you not dying or no negative repercussion?

My first priority is to get my family/myself to cover and out of danger, then assess situation. Maybe I can help, maybe I can't. It just depends on the totality of the situation.

Of course you are likely to run through all of this rather quickly and instinctively if you've given it any thought beforehand, so when confronted with a situation, you can act more quickly and appropriately.

Edit:

All excellent points made by previous postings.

[thetexan]

Of course there are some situations that are more obvious. If I see the event take place like an old woman putting her groceries in her car being attacked I'm going to do something and take my chances.

There comes a point where our civic duty rises to the occasion and the moral dilemma drives our response.

tex

[Soccerdad1995]

This is like the show "what would you do?". Only, unlike that show, reality is not always quite so clear cut.

As others have noted, it is difficult to accurately assess most situations when you do not know the background and also may not have seen the full incident. So I think that the use of force, and especially deadly force should be an absolute last resort, after I have exhausted all other options. If I decide to get involved at all, my goal is to de-escalate the situation if at all possible, while doing everything I can to fully understand what exactly is going on.

[baldeagle]

If you are witnessing something that is potentially illegal, you need to consider first your own safety. Endangering yourself isn't going to help anyone. Secondly, how bad is the situation? Is it life threatening to someone? Is it just a loud argument?

Here's a hypothetical. You exit a store headed toward your car. You hear loud noises and you look in that direction. A man is pulling a woman by her hair trying to drag her into a car. He could be her boyfriend. He could be abducting her. First thing you do is call 911 or have someone else do it. As you are on the phone with them, if you are able, move closer so you can assess the situation more readily. Yell at the guy and tell him you've on the phone with 911 and you're watching him. If he continues, hang up the phone and take pictures of the car, the license plate, the man and the woman. (If you can get someone else to do this, it's much better. Your attention needs to be on the actor at all times.) Tell him you're doing it. After you've taken the pictures, call 911 back and tell them you have pictures, and the incident is still ongoing.

If he escalates instead of backing off, put your hand on your weapon but don't draw. Yell at him to stop. Remind him the police are on the way. Make sure he doesn't have a straight path to get to you. (Put a parked car between you, or some other obstacle he has to go around to get to you.)

The law says you can draw your weapon when someone is using force against you or another person. Doing so is a judgment call. How real do you perceive the threat to be? If the situation continues to escalate, you may have to make the decision to use deadly force. Make sure you are convinced you're justified in doing so.

This is why you should be constantly game planning scenarios in your head. Making on the spot decisions is much more risky than already having a plan. Run the what ifs through your mind, analyze what you did wrong, and improve your plan constantly. Then, if the time ever does come, you can concentrate on the threat rather than trying to decide what to do.

[atx2a]

All good feedback...again, if you'd be justified in force on your own behalf, you're justified on behalf of another. Much like my feelings on open carry, I tend to keep the following principle in mind from Scripture: "All things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial." As it's been said, you have to make those determinations in a split second. If I reasonably believe someone is in imminent danger of physical harm or death, I'm in. Otherwise, I tend to stay out of it.

May sound kinda silly, especially to those who may not espouse a faith perspective, but every time I strap on my weapon, every day, I say a little prayer: "Lord make me WISE, fast, and accurate."

[rotor]

This has come up many times on this forum. There is no easy answer. Calling 911 is great. How can you be sure of who the bad guy is? Things are not always what they appear to be. I don't have the answer but realize that your gut response may actually be wrong and turn against you.

[Glockedandlocked]

Know your penal code, Title 2, Chapter 9, be able to articulate your actions in a manner that leaves no doubt of the necessity of action.

Beyond that, know your conscience and what you can live with.