It is possible that the man's medical history would muddy the waters as to the true cause of death if he survived for three months after the attack, and that is what I suspect the DA meant . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

There are sheep and there are sheep dogs.
There are good dogs, bad dogs, and mad dogs.

Not having a dog in that fight does not make me a sheep.

I'm nearly 70 and i couldn't let that go with only a phone call on my way out.

digiroc

I'm Not a Sheepdog (and you shouldn't be either) | The Arms Guide

I'm Not Your Sheepdog

I like this analogy the best. I am a "porcupine"!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

The question would be did he die from his injuries from the attack or were his age or pre-existing medical conditions the cause of his death or contributed significantly. It is a fine line technically......we have become a society afraid of litigation and of what things look like to others for fear we be labeled something. Could they have prosecuted those kids sure, but the DA does not want to look bad.

Why? What part of Basic Training covered intervening in public domestic violence incidents? What makes agreeing with your point of view "good judgment"?

In this instance, the *** in question could have turned around, drawn his own concealed pistol, and blown the would-be hero away.

Equally, it appears that many are eager to jump right in.

I agree--there is no hard-and-fast one-size-fits-all rule. Well, maybe one. Namely, is there an imminent and unavoidable risk of grave injury or death?

I'm 31. I would like to have at least another 31 incarceration-free years above ground. I can very easily do my civic duty with my gun holstered and a cell phone in hand.

When meeting my future wife's relatives for the first time a drunk/bullying uncle raised a hand to her, I reacted & he was on his back before I had a chance to think of what I was doing, so IDK. A well thrown soup can may have been a better initial weapon, in that instance, with 20/20 hindsight. In some way I'd have intervened, verbally first hopefully.

[QUOTE=

What if the person being assaulted was you when you were unable to protect yourself for what ever reason? Would you just want us to call 911?[/QUOTE]

I'm a man, 6' 1", about 230 lbs. & 62 y.o. But I also have a heart condition, bad back, just had a hip replaced & need the other done, same with knees 1&1, have had hand to hand training when younger but you can bet your sweet bippy...if somebody jumped my ***, I would do what I could to defend...shoot them if possible...but if it was looking like a beat down, I would PRAY that some other "person" would step up & help!

"Pride cometh before a fall"...& I'm too old & worn out to fall...but not too prideful to
live & I'm hoping to do that a while longer.
You can also bet your bottom dollar I would jump right into the mix if I saw someone outnumbered or being abused & I ain't no hero but I am sick of wathcing bystanders on YouTube, videoing some unfortunate soul getting the **** beat out of them & not lifting a finger to help.

I carry for me & mine...but also for you. I refuse to be a sheep. If some call that trying to be a Rambo, I hope there's another like that if it happens to me. JMHO

Wayne

Sent from my SM-T377P using Tapatalk

This was who I was qouting. Good thing I don't depend on editing for a living.

Sent from my SM-T377P using Tapatalk

How to make America Great Again....get the garbage off the streets and keep it off.The liberal turnstile justice system for repeat offenders just doesn't work.

__________________
NEVER GIVE UP YOUR GUN

Be real embarrassing to step in, get involved, and have the male undercover cop bust you for interfering while he was arresting a drug dealer who was resisting. You don't know. Or he pulls a gun and shoots you. And gets away with it because you pulled first.

My instructor pointed out multiple times that you only use the gun to protect self and family and even then only as a last resort.

I am not a cop, my brother is. I don't have the training, my brother does. I keep out of it, and my brother has been retired for years so he does also.

The whole "Sheepdog" concept scares me and it always has. My primary concern is the applied assumption of authority and that's always the part that I have the hardest time putting into words.

I see this underlying theme in most of the sheepdog posts that "I'm going to step in and take charge and save the day." Let me make it clear right now you are not "taking charge" of me or my family and if you try I'm very likely to see it as a direct threat.

I carry a gun for the defense of myself and my family and even that is only if I have no other option. I'm not going to interject myself into your drama just because I have a gun. There's just too much risk involved.

Just a day or so ago a guy was driving down highway 83 (semi rural area) in Colorado when he saw a woman stranded on the side of the road. He stopped to assist and she Tazed him. Her 2 accomplices then beat the **** out of him and robbed him. If some one is stuck on the side of the road the police are in the best position to assist. I call the cops and drive on.

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

Smoke, would you step in (off duty) to help someone you believe needs your skill?
Or just call 911 and wait so you and your family don't get involved.

I don't have the "i'm here to save the day" mentality that you invoked about folks who would or do step up.
You do what you think is right.
I've lived a long time never second guessing what I have done.

OK, So first let's clarify that "my skillz" are long out of date. I have not worked as an EMT or even in the medical field for years. Having said that there's no black and white answer. At work I am surrounded by trained medical professionals and I would get the Hell out of their way and let them do their job.

Away from work I have stepped in (never ended well) and I have called EMS and let them handle it (worked out much better)


I guess I didn't communicate clearly enough, it's not the "Here I am to save the day" mentality that I object to its the "I'm going to take charge" attitude. Let me say it again you are not "taking charge" of me or mine.

Having said all that let me clarify that this discussion is largely hypothetical to me in any case. Neither myself nor my wife are comfortable around large crowds. So, when I'm not at work I prefer to stay home. So the odds of me running into this situation are pretty close to nil anyway.

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

My brother once stopped a guy from beating a woman and while he was struggling with him she started smacking my brother on the head with a high heal. Left a bunch of little knots.

But, it depends on a lot of things. If I believed he was doing her some serious bodily harm, I would stop him. Wouldn't shoot unless absolutely no other choice. Way to many variables.

With all the back and forth here..........

I think that we are in agreement that it depends on how the situation unfolds? Our capabilities? Who we do or don't have with us?

That's why I say "my terms". Situational awareness and quick decision making are necessary.

And I also say to "blindly intervene". If you don't quickly assess the situation and run towards the event, you're being foolish.

We can all say what we would or wouldn't do. But if are not capable of the above, step back and call 911.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

Simple. Of the available options, you choose one ...I choose the other.

They probably aren't even aware of what the eventual outcome was.
Even if the old man did not die, I still find it reprehensible that so many people will stand by and watch this type of thing happen. To borrow a line from the movie, Open Range... "There are things that eat at a man worse than dyin".

If the message were delivered that "we"- the law abiding public aren't going to stand for it, there might be a reduction in the number of thugs so quickly willing to inflict harm on others.

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

This attack is one that the deputy who taught my CC class was involved with taking witness statements, and used as an example of the possible levels of involvement and non-involvement. He was not suggesting a course of action, just legal ramifications.

The woman was brutally attacked and killed at the checkout area of a local Walmart during the Christmas shopping rush, in front of a large group of shoppers. The deputy said seven of the witnesses were armed and permitted CC. None of them intervened. Eventually an unarmed shopper ran the killer off, but too late to help the victim.

This was the eventual outcome.

Sheriff’s Office found grossly negligent in fatal stabbing in Walmart

Again, I don't find that it equates in the slightest. In the situation you list, there's an immediate and unavoidable risk of death or grave injury. It meets reasonable-person standards, and there are multiple witnesses.

I also take a bit of exception to the deputy. Forget which of the witnesses was a CCW holder--how many were actually armed, and of those, how many had anything more substantial than a .380 micro-pistol? How many had their families with them?

Guns aren't bad-guy off switches.

The other thing is, knife attacks are fast. I'd wager that by the time anybody figured out what was going on, the victim's injuries were lethal.

Reading the story, the real problem seems to have been incompetent dispatching and logging. Also:

Forget security, it's time to gtfo.

I'd at least of grabbed a chair and beaten the guy over the head unconscious. I'd never be one of seven nearby witnesses who do nothing, while this guy stabs & beats his wife to death. I am who I am. Do as you please.

I think you misunderstand, LAA. I object not because I feel that the situation did not warrant intervention, I object because I feel that it is not the same as the sort of situation we were describing.

Namely--one meets the imminent/unavoidable standard, and the other one doesn't. Equating the two is a false comparison, and trying to use it in an argument is called "moving the goal posts".

I would further suggest that if one is going to carry, then being able to easily see the difference is kind've key. Although I'd bet a lot of people would be shocked at how many morons out there don't.

But, if you are happy to use a chair to fight a guy with a knife, I'll leave you to it. I am quite happy to dishonor myself by using a firearm, thank you.

The description has to do with the guy stabbing his wife, not me. At least not yet. But when you think about it, just imagine someone charging with a knife, from 10 or 15 feet away. Say my firearm is holstered IWB. If a chair was in arms length......I wouldn't hesitate to pull it between us. Would require quick thinking though, wouldn't it? Perhaps to quick, if totally unsuspecting. Other than that, it's like the Indiana Jones sequence, in which the enemy is swirling his knife, as if Indiana will do the same. Of course not, he just simply pulls his pistol out. Oh.............the movies...

In all reality, if someone rushes a knife on one of us, from 10 or 15', without warning, we'll probably feel the result, before we can do much.

A good friend and I watched "Surviving edged weapons". We then proceeded to "test" the 21 foot rule. Boy, did it open our eyes to edged weapon attacks. Pretty much anything less than 21 feet and you can forget your firearm. This was with us KNOWING what we were going to do. I can just imagine how much longer it will take to react to a edged weapon attack. What 21 feet gives you is the chance to move and draw at the same time. Staying static at 21 feet and you may very well still get cut.

As far as impact weapons go, I'll take a knife over a bat, chair, etc. anytime. You may break my bones but I'll be cutting you once we engage. In life or death a broken arm is worth being able to spill you intestines on the floor.

Real fights are brutal, horrible events. No one leaves unscathed. The winner of a street fight is the one that doesn't end up in the morgue.

Sent from my SM-T377V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

It's called 'diffusion of responsibility". The more people watching, the less your chances of getting help. Somebody else will take care of it. It's why we need cops, firemen, other trained, uniformed designated responders.
Very few know what they will do when the excrement hits the propeller, unless they have had rigorous training and been through it before.

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

It would depend on the situation, if I deemed it life or death then everything changes. If it's a domestic dispute I probably call 911 unless I see a weapon being used by a man on a woman. Bottom line is everyone of us has to look ourselves in the mirror everyday, are you proud or ashamed of what actions you took or didn't take. If I either just stood and watched a man beating a woman or even if I decided to just turn and walk away and cover my own fanny, how good can I possibly feel about myself. Then again, maybe that doesn't matter to some people. Do what you feel is right, I'll do the same.

I carry to protect me and mine. If someone else doesn't want to arm themselves to do the same who am I to argue. Hopefully if you intervened it would be in a situation where you end up with no criminal issues but even then expect to be sued. Is the victim going to pay my legal fees for civil court? I care far too much about me and my loved ones to put everyone through that. If there are those are are offended by that - too bad! Oh, oh but what if someone in your family was attacked; changes nothing in my answer.

__________________
K & N S&W revolvers

I've known SO many self-destructive women who keep going back to abusive men that the woman would literally have to be unconscious while being beaten in order for me to get involved in anything that even smells like a domestic dispute.

A woman once said to me wistfully, "I wonder what my ex-boyfriend (who used to choke her) is doing now."

My unspoken response, "Probably choking somebody better looking..."

CAREFULL. If that person knows how to use a bat you most likely won't get a chance to do anything.


Umm...hands can be deadly weapons. What if he's choking her to death?

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

Why bother with concealed carry if all you have to say is "hey, stop doing that" to a bad guy.

1. I'm not a cop.
2. I don't want to be a cop.
3. I don't want other people to think I'm a cop.
4. I don't want to do what cops do... for free.

Police have no legal duty to protect me as an individual.

I certainly have no more duty to protect a total stranger as an individual. I especially have no such duty when there's a non-zero chance that that person may either lie to police and portray ME as the aggressor, or indeed assault ME for my trouble.

Would I go in shooting if somebody shouting "Allahu akhbar!" started shooting up the line to see Santa? Yes.

Would I get involved in a domestic dispute about which I know NOTHING, including the mental health and truthfulness of the apparent victim? Probably not.

If it seems like a domestic dispute and there's no weapon and no OBVIOUS and IMMEDIATE danger of FATALITY, I'm not getting involved beyond dialing 911 and maybe videoing the attack for evidence.

But then I have little expectation that if I shoot a long lost Tsarnaev brother while he's slaughtering toddlers at the mall, that one of the victim's parents will tell the cops that ***I*** started the whole thing, and that Miguelito Tsarnaev was a "good provider" who was "turning his life around".

Women themselves have created the situation where it's safer to leave them to their own devices than to intervene to save them. They're going to have to own that.

Kudos on getting out there and experimenting. Movement is usually prudent in such cases although there are indeed instances where it may not be possible. A lot of folks fail to understand the dynamics and why I encourage participating in a Force on Force class.

In terms of impact weapon vs blade, the effectiveness of either weapon will depend on the individuals involved and the specifics of the particular scenario.

The same goes for the idea that nobody leaves unscathed in an actual steet fight. That simply isn't true, even when weapons are involved.

There are so many variables in these situations that make it difficult to definitively say "I would do this" or "I would do that". Truth is I don't know what I would do. If life is on the line, I sure as heck hope I do the right thing in the moment.

.

As in life, there are exceptions to everything. There are not absolutes when humans are involved.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

We can play hypothetical ad nauseam. I'm responding to the punch situation presented in the OP.
As much as I might wish to be the Ramboesque physical specimen presented in the movies by Angelina Jolie, the reality is the polar opposite. Walking, breathing, and seeing are a challenge for me, so I'm not entering a structure with the intent of going to battle.

If he's doing it to me or mine, I'll do a lot more than say "hey, stop doing that . . . " He'll stop doing that. That's why I carry a weapon . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

If "walking, breathing, and seeing are a challenge" for you, it's safe to say you are understandably *removed* from the group to whom the question of intervening is directed!

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

Quote:

..The same goes for the idea that nobody leaves unscathed in an actual steet fight. That simply isn't true even when weapons are involved. I'm living proof of it.

Why did you "edit" his quote and add something he did not say? ("I'm living proof of it")


Did he say that was all you had to do, or did he suggest that as a first action - giving the BG an option?

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

Kodiakco posted at 9:12. Mister X edited at 9:18. I saw the original post. it is quoted accurately . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

Thank you MM!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

This is correct. I decided to edit it and had it open for a few minutes after having to step away and never saw his response.

It depends on what you view as being an exception. I've known and trained many LEO's who have been in countless fights and didn't suffer any serious injuries. I was involved in numerous violent encounters when working plainclothes security and elsewhere and emerged from them unscathed. I've also had quite a few civilian students who survived violent attacks no worse for wear.

I have walked away from armed encounters unscathed, as have numerous friends of mine.

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

First you have to discount all the LEO. 1. That's their job 2. They are trained for physical encounters. 3. A uniform, badge, gun and superior numbers makes a difference.

Again, not everyone get hurt. No guarantees LEO or not. You are also citing personal experiences. That is a very small sample size relative to the whole of the USA.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

Your original post said no one...."Real fights are brutal, horrible events. No one leaves unscathed. The winner of a street fight is the one that doesn't end up in the morgue."

Then you said there are exceptions, which still isn't true either.

What facts are you basing your assertions on?

In 3 decades of teaching LEO's as well as having several family members in Law Enforcement, I've had access to information about numerous self-defense cases involving ordinary civilians. I even see such stories on the news on a fairly regular basis and have witnessed a few first hand, even a successful unarmed knife disarm by an untrained individual which is about as precarious as it gets. The idea that you will assuredly get horribly injured in an ECQ or any type of defense scenario is simply not factual.

It's a commonly held misconception.

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

I can't presume to begin to suggest a course of action to anyone other than someone I might be training in a FTO program, and those days are behind me.

That said, any attempted intervention in any suspected, in-progress violent crime, whether an interrupted robbery or the range of things can fall within the heading of a "domestic", can be fraught with risk and unwanted consequences. LE have the partial shield of qualified immunity, while good Samaritans are probably mostly at the mercy of the local laws. Civil consequences can be expensive, too, depending on the state's laws.

Anyway, having been trained and experienced in such things, yes, depending on what I could see in the totality of circumstances of a specific situation, and if my wife or a grand daughter were not with me, I'd probably attempt to intervene by commanding the male to stop. My 'Command' voice apparently still gets immediate attention, and I've been told (by wife and friends) that I've slipped into projecting a demeanor where my body language, expression and general posture still appears as though I'm preparing to take command of a situation. Weird, and not something I was aware of doing at those times.

What I might, or might not, be willing to do if verbal intervention wasn't successful in stopping such an incident? Well, that's one of those situations where I'd offer, "It depends". On a lot of things.

Something that bothers me about this reported incident, though, is in this statement:

Lots of questions come to mind about what was happening leading up to that moment.

Drawing and presenting a gun is a dangerous event, even if it's done lawfully, reasonably and appropriately.

I wonder if the good Samaritan ever thought that someone might attempt to take control of his gun in such a situation?

Also, while much has been mentioned regarding the suspect's criminal background and history, it might be prudent to bear in mind that it generally isn't considered relevant to the good Samaritan's actions if it's not known to the good Samaritan at the time of the incident. It's something to be noted in the report & investigation, and something to be considered during the sentencing report, but probably suppressed during any trial, until and unless the suspect is eventually convicted of the current charge(s).

The interesting question here is for the good Samaritan, after this case is finally adjudicated. Would he do anything different, if it were to occur again?

Just some thoughts.

As a retired cop, I can't over-emphasize the inherent, unforeseen and unwanted dangers and risks to someone if attempting to intervene in a "domestic" incident, especially one involving strangers in public.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

@Mister X, I will agree that "no one" is to definitive and that "rarely" would have been more accurate. Based solely on my limited knowledge and research, I stand by the essence of what I said.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

__________________
Improvise, Adapt, Overcome

the mental attitude of I'm not going to get involved is the same reason Chicago and other big cities in America have such a bad gang banger problem everyone looks the other way and doesn't want to get involved ..

No, it's not.

In order for the two to be equivalent, the "samaritan" would have to intervene on the side of the ASSAILANT, and for PROFIT.

Equating rampant corruption with a well founded fear of having one's attempt to do the right thing boomerang, is borne out neither by the facts nor elementary logic.

There's a world of difference between my not wanting to be sued, arrested or assaulted for helping somebody who doesn't really want to be helped, and my taking money to turn a blind eye to organized criminal activity.

No. There are a lot of reasons for Chicago. People not getting involved is a symptom, not a cause.

You get involved, you can die or be injured seriously enough to severely alter your life and your families. Carrying a gun does not give you enchanted body armor. The gun is just one last final option .