A Vehicle as a means of self defense

[Randall53]

Not so long ago, due to current events in many cities,  I joined an organization that will defend you if you are involved with in an action of self defense against someone attempting bodily harm or death of you or a loved one.  I recently had a chance to ask some questions about being attacked by a violent group or groups of folks that are stopping folks in their vehicles and attacking them and dragging them out of their vehicle with the intent to beat and possible murder the occupant or occupants. This conversation was after I was told they would defend you no matter what means or weapon you legally used in the altercation. I was told that in that type of scenario if you injured or killed the attackers while using your vehicle to stop or to escape the attack they would considered It an act of lawful self defense and it would be covered by their services. It got me to thinking and I know there’s no way I would just sit there and let that happen to me or my wife. Do any of you have any thoughts on this as far as your vehicle being a legal self defense weapon in this scenario? 

[Raoul]

My thoughts are this...I will attempt to the best of my ability, to avoid a scenario such as this. If I am attacked I will use anything available to avoid or counteract a confrontation. However I refuse to be anyone's victim. I will not go quietly or passively. Just my .02...

[chances R]

Andrew Branca has addressed this several times recently.  One, I would never(well never say never) consider my vehicle as my weapon.  It would be my method of avoidance and/or escape.  One must avoid the possiblility of disabling the vehicle which would include turning it over.  Don't worry about traffic laws.  Having someone stand or beat on your car is NOT justification to use deadly force.  If you compartment is violated, doors yanked open, window broken out, etc., then deadly force would/should be an option.  Try moving slowly through a crowd to minimize getting into that situation.  Blowing you horn may aggravate the crowd, so use your own judgement.  If you can articulate your concern for your safety and your escape then hopefully that will justify any possible legal jepordy, but your legal risk is never '0'.  Avoidance is always the best policy.

[DaveTN]

This question has come up before. Often the answer is often “drive away”. Well, that’s common sense, so I assume people are asking about when you can’t drive away, without running over people. 

Every situation will be different. The bottom line is, would a reasonable person believe you were in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm. Surrounding your car and yelling at you, would not meet that criteria. Someone approaching your car with a gun in their hand, someone threatening you while carrying a rifle or someone breaching your vehicle and trying to grab you, would.

However keep in mind that in these situation, even if you are obviously justified, if you happen to get one of these liberal far left DA’s on the case, the chances are very good you are going to trial. There will probably be very little, if any, video of what happened prior, but there will be plenty of video of you running over people.

We are now living in a time where in some areas of the country, to some politicians, protecting violent criminal thugs is more important than protecting innocent citizens.

I would think that one of the biggest factors to a jury in a questionable case would be “why were you there?” Sure, there could be a situation where you would have to drive through a riot. That shouldn’t be a factor in applying the deadly force laws; but I suspect it would be.

Getting a conviction would be hard for a DA that has run amuck in a case like this. You only need one juror to believe you were justified. But that doesn’t mean that DA won’t use his office to financially destroy you.

[FUJIMO]

Theres about to be a good example of how this will play out for those trying to get through their day to day and suddenly find yourself in the middle of a protest. Up around Raouls area in the Tri Cities a man is now being charged with hit and run and aggravated assault with his vehicle after hitting at least 1 maybe 2 pedestrians/BLM protestors. I'm not posting a link or giving my opinion at this time. I hope the next BLM protest has handicap parking

[DaveTN]

Well... here we go in this very situation in Tennessee.....

His employer didn’t waste any time in cutting ties with him.

 

[FUJIMO]

14 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Well... here we go in this very situation in Tennessee.....

His employer didn’t waste any time in cutting ties with him.

 

Thats the one I just mentioned . Thanks Dave !

Edited September 16, 2020 by FUJIMO

[chances R]

There needs to be a law that makes for penalties to impede traffic with protests.  Also in this case, retribution for damages and court costs if acquitted.

[DaveTN]

12 minutes ago, FUJIMO said:

Thats the one I just mentioned . Thanks Dave !

That’s why I posted it, thanks for the info. As I suspected in the prior post, there is good video of him plowing over people, one story even said the dog managed to escape injury, along with claiming the person hit was a “photographer” instead of a protestor. But so far, none of what took place, or what the protestors were doing on his side of the vehicle. I have no idea if he was justified or not, but he’s arrested, charged, and his employer has cut ties. Luckily they allowed him to bond out quickly, that may have not happened somewhere else. Him and his family are in for a world of grief.

[DaveTN]

8 minutes ago, chances R said:

There needs to be a law that makes for penalties to impede traffic with protests. 

There already is. They aren't being enforced. 

Quote

39-17-307. Obstructing highway or other passageway.
(a) A person commits an offense who, without legal privilege, intentionally, knowingly or recklessly:
(1) Obstructs a highway, street, sidewalk, railway, waterway, elevator, aisle, or hallway to which the public, or a substantial portion of the public, has access; or any other place used for the passage of persons, vehicles or conveyances, whether the obstruction arises from the person's acts alone or from the person's acts and the acts of others; or
(2) Disobeys a reasonable request or order to move issued by a person known to be a law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or a person with authority to control the use of the premises to:
(A) Prevent obstruction of a highway or passageway; or
(B) Maintain public safety by dispersing those gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot or other hazard.
(b) For purposes of this section, “obstruct” means to render impassable or to render passage unreasonably inconvenient or potentially injurious to persons or property.
(c)
(1) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
(2) Notwithstanding subdivision (c)(1), an offense under subdivision (a)(1) is a Class B misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of two hundred dollars ($200) if, at the time of the violation, the person obstructs an emergency vehicle from accessing the highway or street, or highway's or street's right-of-way. As used in this subdivision (c)(2), “emergency vehicle” means any vehicle of a governmental department or public service corporation when responding to an emergency, any vehicle of a police or fire department, and any ambulance.
(d)
(1) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section, which must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, that:
(A) Solicitation and collection of charitable donations at a highway or street intersection were undertaken by members of an organization that has received a determination of exemption from the internal revenue service under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3) or (4);
(B) The members of the organization undertook reasonable and prudent precautions to prevent both disruption of traffic flow and injury to person or property; and
(C) The solicitation and collection at the specific time and place and the specific precautions were proposed in advance to, and received the prior written approval of, the administrative head of the local law enforcement agency in whose jurisdiction the intersection is located.
(2) No liability for any accident or other occurrence that arises from solicitations shall attach to the sheriff or government involved in issuing the permit, but shall be borne solely by the organization obtaining the permit.
(3) This subsection (d) shall not be construed to supersede or affect any ordinance relative to collecting donations at public intersections in effect on July 1, 1993.
(4) Any municipality by ordinance may prohibit roadblocks within its corporate limits notwithstanding this subsection (d).

 

Edited September 16, 2020 by DaveTN

[FUJIMO]

5 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

That’s why I posted it, thanks for the info. As I suspected in the prior post, there is good video of him plowing over people, one story even said the dog managed to escape injury, along with claiming the person hit was a “photographer” instead of a protestor. But so far, none of what took place, or what the protestors were doing on his side of the vehicle. I have no idea if he was justified or not, but he’s arrested, charged, and his employer has cut ties. Luckily they allowed him to bond out quickly, that may have not happened somewhere else. Him and his family are in for a world of grief.

There's more than 1 video? Only one I've seen is what the news is looping and thats from the pov of a bystander on the passenger side from another car through their windshield. 

[DaveTN]

1 minute ago, FUJIMO said:

There's more than 1 video? 

Not that I have seen. 

[Ronald_55]

5 minutes ago, FUJIMO said:

There's more than 1 video? Only one I've seen is what the news is looping and thats from the pov of a bystander on the passenger side from another car through their windshield. 

No one protesting that got a video that justifies his actions is going to come forward. If he is lucky a concerned citizen bystander might have got something on film. Otherwise this WILL be a VERY uphill battle for him. In addition to his employer dropping him, I foresee his car insurance doing it also. Every business he works with is going to make him a pariah. On the other side, when civil cases come forth, I am betting a well versed big time lawyer is supplied to the protester by unknown sources. 

In addition, we can look for much larger protests in this area to show opposition to him. Plus with the last few years, most police officers will be shy to stop the protesters for fear of being dismissed and seeing lawsuits themselves. They need a paycheck for their families too. 

[Dirtshooter]

Biblical truths coming out. Isaiah5:20 What sorrow for those who say that evil is good and good is evil,

[E4 No More]

1 hour ago, chances R said:

There needs to be a law that makes for penalties to impede traffic with protests.  Also in this case, retribution for damages and court costs if acquitted.

I believe that it is illegal under federal statutes to impeded an Interstate. I base this on the signs that used to be posted on the ramps that prohibited pedestrian traffic.

https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2016/09/is-it-legal-for-protesters-to-block-traffic.html

Blame the Mayors for allowing it to happen.

Edited September 16, 2020 by E4 No More

[DaveTN]

19 minutes ago, Ronald_55 said:

No one protesting that got a video that justifies his actions is going to come forward. If he is lucky a concerned citizen bystander might have got something on film. Otherwise this WILL be a VERY uphill battle for him. In addition to his employer dropping him, I foresee his car insurance doing it also. Every business he works with is going to make him a pariah. On the other side, when civil cases come forth, I am betting a well versed big time lawyer is supplied to the protester by unknown sources. 

In addition, we can look for much larger protests in this area to show opposition to him. Plus with the last few years, most police officers will be shy to stop the protesters for fear of being dismissed and seeing lawsuits themselves. They need a paycheck for their families too. 

I would guess if there is video; it will come out. If I was investigating that incident, I would have the phone of the guy that was hit. And I would ask any witnesses to voluntarily give me their phones for inspection. If they refused I would hold them and try to get a warrant. However, I would be trying to find out what really happened. We can only hope the Police and DA are doing that.

As far as his job goes…he is a realtor. If he tried to stay with that he would be a pretty easy target. If he was legally justified in what he did; he still will have a tough way to go.

This incident is a good example of what we can expect in these times.

I’m not saying he was justified, I have no idea, and the only video I’ve seen doesn’t change that.

[Dirtshooter]

Ask Reginald Denny if he will stop for a bunch of thugs trying to hurt him again. His skull was fractured in 91 places as well as other injuries. He should have never stopped, making any of them a hood ornament.  The thug that threw the cement block at him was convicted of murder in 2000 and got 46 years in prison, fine upstanding citizen.

[AuEagle]

Hope this works.

 

[E4 No More]

I will not use my vehicle to run people down to escape. That's pretty hard to defend being no different than accidentally shooting a bystander standing behind a person trying to kill you. As much as it sucks, I have insurance for the vehicle. My vehicles automatically lock the doors when in drive, so if someone busts the window to drag me or mine out then lead will fly as that is carjacking.

[Randall53]

3 hours ago, DaveTN said:

 

This question has come up before. Often the answer is often “drive away”. Well, that’s common sense, so I assume people are asking about when you can’t drive away, without running over people

 

Thanks Dave. This was the meat of my conversation with the representative. You get caught in a situation that you can’t avoid and rioters are blocking vehicles, beating the glass out and dragging innocent people out of their vehicles To beat and kick them causing bodily harm. There are countless videos of this all over the internet. For instance 

 

[Ronald_55]

7 minutes ago, Randall53 said:

Thanks Dave. This was the meat of my conversation with the representative. You get caught in a situation that you can’t avoid and rioters are blocking vehicles, beating the glass out and dragging innocent people out of their vehicles To beat and kick them causing bodily harm. There are countless videos of this all over the internet. For instance 

 

I am confused... Are the guys in that video pulling them from the car not wearing Police labeled gear? I know this is just an example, but is it not the reverse of the situation? Though some context as to why this particular car was swarmed, windows smashed, and tires slashed would need to be in place to know what went on. 

[DaveTN]

17 minutes ago, Ronald_55 said:

I am confused... Are the guys in that video pulling them from the car not wearing Police labeled gear? I know this is just an example, but is it not the reverse of the situation? Though some context as to why this particular car was swarmed, windows smashed, and tires slashed would need to be in place to know what went on. 

Yes, they are Police Officers. Two were fired immediately and three are on desk duty pending investigation. Apparently, an Officer yelled “He’s got a gun!” There was no gun.

The Officers engaged with the occupants acted recklessly. With someone yelling gun, these people are lucky to be alive.

 

[chances R]

and sometimes one has to do whatever it takes to survive.  IF someone is trying to turn your car over, or breeches the passenger compartment it is reasonably assumed that your life is in danger and come what may, I'm driving off and if someone is injured then that is really on their accomplices.  If it turns out bad, well that's life but staying there is not an option. 

[hipower]

4 hours ago, Ronald_55 said:

I am confused... Are the guys in that video pulling them from the car not wearing Police labeled gear? I know this is just an example, but is it not the reverse of the situation? Though some context as to why this particular car was swarmed, windows smashed, and tires slashed would need to be in place to know what went on. 

Yes. What is going on here. Breaking glass and slashing tires? Why?

[TomInMN]

So, breaching the passenger compartment constitutes carjacking. (I don't know if that's the case, but it seems plausible.) How does joint venture come into play here? If two or three people are breaking windows and standing on the side of the car, are you considered justified in running over a half dozen people in your (and your vehicle's) path as you escape?