CCW case...agree or disagree??

[Putty]

Check out this article

 

http://www.onntv.com/live/content/onnnews/stories/2010/09/21/story-wadsworth-crime-couple.html

 

 

I disagree considering they lied to the dispatcher. It's a good thing they helped, but they broke the law in this case, imo.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

I dunno. There's not really any detailed info on how it went down to get a feel for their mindset. You're probably right though.

 

It's probably best as a witness to just call the police and steer clear, but sometimes that's not quick enough for the victim. I guess you have to decide on the spot if it's worth the legal risk of getting involved.

[TTQ B4U]

I can't say I would have pulled my gun in that case, but I'd certainly call the cops and follow the guy. The only time I'm pulling my gun out in a case like that is if the guy saw me watching, dialing the cops and then came after me. At that point, I'd "be in fear for my life" and safety. I'm not a CCW Holder in order to play wanna be cop.

[oh8sti]

i woulda yanked that dude out of the car and pummled his ass, called the cops, drive away.

[Bam]

I don't see the problem, they weren't in a place that guns weren't allowed, and they didn't shoot anyone... Edited September 22, 2010 by Bam
had to add n't

[RC K9]

They shouldn't have lied to the police. That being said, I believ in the state of Ohio you are allowed to use your firearm to aid another person in danger. In fact, since they didn't fire their weapons, I don't think they broke the law at all. What could they be charged with since they didn't do anything? Had they shot the guy...that would be a different story.

[99FLHRCI]

They shouldn't have lied to the police. That being said, I believ in the state of Ohio you are allowed to use your firearm to aid another person in danger. In fact, since they didn't fire their weapons, I don't think they broke the law at all. What could they be charged with since they didn't do anything? Had they shot the guy...that would be a different story.

 

I agree with both points. I don't think that pulling their weapon was a crime. Had they shot him the only reason I would call it a bad shooting is they claimed they were in fear for their life and not in fear of her life. Think of it like this... guy comes up behind you and grabs your friend, g/f, wife, child, etc. Places a knife to their throat. and says give me your money. At this point you are in fear for their life not yours however, you are still justified in shooting them.

[jjjxlr8]

They should have shot the man if they pulled their guns. Period. If you pull your gun, you better pull the trigger. If you don't feel it's necessary to pull the trigger, don't pull the gun.

[RC K9]

They should have shot the man if they pulled their guns. Period. If you pull your gun, you better pull the trigger. If you don't feel it's necessary to pull the trigger, don't pull the gun.

 

If that were the mentality than a lot of innocent people would be dead at the hands of cops. The idea is to stop the threat and there is such a thing as elevation of force. Why shoot if it is not necessary at that point? The whole reason for pulling the firearm is IN CASE you need to fire, not necessarily for the sole purpose of having to fire.

[cinergi]

A man beating on a woman does not need a gun pulled on him. I'm saying the dude is a douche bag pussy and it could have been handled differently.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it gets enough attention that they'll see charges for having a gun around children or some other messed up charge.

 

I have always felt you should not intervene in other peoples' issues unless you are directly affected. I am not saying what they did was wrong, as I am assuming most other people would have too, but open yourself up to legal attacks that are no fun to fight off.

The situation could go both ways and the people drawing guns could have been attacked, too. You just never know what the other situation was or how it can play out.

 

 

Remember that story years ago when that Taxi driver chased down that guy who stole the woman's purse and pinned the prep against the wall with the car. He got the piss sued out of him for trying to do the right thing.

 

Shit sucks and there is no easy answer or solution for things like that. There's no true line that says what you can and cannot do, which leaves anything to be able to happen.

 

I probably would have intervened myself, but my first reaction sure as hell would not have been my gun. Plenty of other tools could have been dispersed to re/solve that situation.

[cinergi]

I always told my students don't get involved in the shit if it's not friends or family.

[Mr. Jones]

I always told my students don't get involved in the shit if it's not friends or family.

 

+1

[wnaplay1647545503]

If I am morally obligated to assist someone in danger in the eyes of the law, I would also feel that doing so would put my life in danger, therefore I would fear for my safety and be justified. You can be charged for not aiding smeone in danger.

[Putty]

I always told my students don't get involved in the shit if it's not friends or family.

 

 

My instructor told me this in so many words, but even when it comes to friends getting their ass kicked...it's not my life in danger. The attacker is whipping their ass, not mine, so I could walk away. Therefore, pulling my weapon to assist is against the laws...that was told to me.

The cardinal rule is you engage to 'stop a threat against you'....no one else...other than family of course. To tell a dispatcher they are in fear of their lives cause they see a man beating a chic within his own car....c'mon!

[RC K9]

I have always felt you should not intervene in other peoples' issues unless you are directly affected.

 

Ohh come on...it's the american way to interfere with other people's issues that really have nothing to do with us. I think these fine citizens are just following the example set forth by their government. You can't fault someone for that can you?

 

Page 23 of the attorney general handbook. Interpret as you will..

 

 

 

Defense of Others

A person may defend another only if the protected person would have

had the right to use deadly force in self-defense themselves. Under

Ohio law, a person may defend family members, friends or strangers.

However, just as if he were protecting himself, a person cannot use

any more force than is reasonable and necessary to prevent the harm

threatened.

A defendant, who claims he used deadly force to protect another, has

to prove that he reasonably and honestly believed that the person he

protected was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm or death

and that deadly force was the only way to protect the person from that

danger. Furthermore, the defendant must also show that the protected

person was not at fault for creating the situation and did not have a

duty to leave or avoid the situation.

WARNING: The law specifically discourages citizens from taking

matters into their own hands and acting as law enforcement. This

is true even if the person thinks he is performing a good deed by

protecting someone or helping law enforcement. The Ohio Supreme

Court has ruled that a person risks criminal charges if he interferes

in a struggle and protects the person who was at fault, even if he

mistakenly believed that person did not create the situation.

In other words, if you misinterpret a situation and interfere, you

may face criminal charges because your use of deadly force is not

justified. If you do not know all the facts and interfere, you will not be

justified to use force. It does not matter that you mistakenly believed

another was in danger and not at fault.

Of greater concern than risking criminal charges is the fact that

you may be putting yourself and others in danger. If you use your

handgun to interfere in a situation, and an officer arrives on the

scene, the officer will not be able to tell if you are the criminal or if

you are the Good Samaritan.

24

Ohio law does not encourage vigilantism. A license to carry a

concealed handgun does not deputize you as a law enforcement

agent. Officers are trained to protect members of the community,

handle all types of situations, and enforce the law. Do not allow

the license to carry a concealed handgun give you a false sense of

security or empowerment. Let law enforcement officers do their job.

If you want to be a Good Samaritan, call the police.

[Putty]

Thanks for that.

[RC K9]

What I take from that is, you can help, but that's not to say you aren't going to get hit with criminal/civil charges since technically you put yourself in that situation. It's a coin toss.

 

If I were in that situation and I saw some lady with kids getting punched in the face, I would probably call the police then try to diffuse the situation without pulling my gun. I would only pull the gun if the dude came after me. If he was really whaling on her, i would probably hand my gun to my wife then try to restrain the man...that way if I start getting whooped on or stabbed, she can shoot him for me. I wouldn't necessarily want to rush into a fight and take a chance at my gun getting taken away...

 

Ultimately I hope to never find myself in this situation as our legal system has made it as such, an individual is better off to not get involved and let someone get physically harmed or killed...

 

I guess it comes down to, can you justify in your own mind and sleep at night by not getting involved and letting a lady get beat in front of her kids knowing you could have stopped it...

[John Bruh]

should of just pulled him out of the car and beat his ass. That's what I would of done. That kind of shit those kids are never going to forget because of that piece of shit.

[jjjxlr8]

If that were the mentality than a lot of innocent people would be dead at the hands of cops. The idea is to stop the threat and there is such a thing as elevation of force. Why shoot if it is not necessary at that point? The whole reason for pulling the firearm is IN CASE you need to fire, not necessarily for the sole purpose of having to fire.

 

These people were not cops. Cops don't have to play by the same rules as a civilian with a CCW.

[smokin5s]

These people were not cops. Cops don't have to play by the same rules as a civilian with a CCW.

+1

[RC K9]

These people were not cops. Cops don't have to play by the same rules as a civilian with a CCW.

 

Some dude came at my best freind a few years ago threatening him with a baseball bat. As the guy was walking towards him my buddy pulled his gun out and told the dude he should leave. Dude left and my buddy neever heard from him again. Now explain to me why in the world my buddy should have just pulled the trigger and ended a life when clearly that was not what was necessary at that point?

[verse]

These people were not cops. Cops don't have to play by the same rules as a civilian with a CCW.

 

And no where in the "rules" does it say you must pull the trigger if you pull out your gun. So what's the difference?

[cinergi]

And no where in the "rules" does it say you must pull the trigger if you pull out your gun. So what's the difference?

 

This is absolutely correct. But I always tell people you have no business pulling out your gun unless you intend to use it. A gun is not designed to deter a situation, it is designed to end it. Anyone carrying a gun should be using it as a last line of defense. Any man should be able to defuse a situation without his gun. If he is just pulling a gun out with no intent to use it, he is a pussy and deserves for someone to shoot him. :bangbang:

 

I believe in using an edged weapon, then people think you're really crazy.

[verse]

This is absolutely correct. But I always tell people you have no business pulling out your gun unless you intend to use it. A gun is not designed to deter a situation, it is designed to end it. Anyone carrying a gun should be using it as a last line of defense.

 

I absolutely believe that. If you pull it, you should have the intent to use it. Although, if you pull your gun and people back off, are you still going to use it?

 

Let's say someone, your friend maybe, is getting jumped by 3 guys with baseball bats. Are you just going to pull out the weapon and start shooting them even if they start running off after seeing you are armed?

[cinergi]

I absolutely believe that. If you pull it, you should have the intent to use it. Although, if you pull your gun and people back off, are you still going to use it?

 

Let's say someone, your friend maybe, is getting jumped by 3 guys with baseball bats. Are you just going to pull out the weapon and start shooting them even if they start running off after seeing you are armed?

 

You know the answer to that. I wouldn't have pulled out my gun. There are plenty of other ways to deal with a situation like that than pull a gun. I'm not afraid to take a hit from a baseball bat, I've taken much worse than that before. Once they introduce a gun into the situation, then I'll pull mine unless I feel like carving a fool up. I'm not saying I am billy bad ass, but I have seen enough and personally been a part of enough to know how to resolve serious situations without the use of a firearm.