Rendering Aid

[mikegideon]

The law says you can use deadly force to STOP A THREAT. If you use any other language, then you could easlily wind up in prison, even though you shot them in exactly the same place. It's about intent.

[Guest bkelm18]

Most any serious self defense gurus I've heard have always preached that you shoot to stop the threat, not to kill. Once the threat is over, your ability to use lethal force is over. The purpose of a self defense shooting is to stop the threat against you, not to kill the person. If the person dies, so be it, but your intent is not murder.

[RobertNashville]

No reason for folks to get mad at each other...I think many are saying the same thing; just not the same way.

Obviously, in a self-defense situation you are going to aim center mass because that gives you the best chance to hit the bad guy and because that is where most of the vital organs are. It's pretty logical to assume that if you do happen to hit that target one or more times there is a high likelihood that the bad guy will die. But, our INTENT should be to stop the threat; not KILL the threat. The result may be identical but our intent shouldn't be.

As I understand the law (and I claim no special knowledge); anytime one person kills another it is a homicide; whether it's ruled a murder followed by charges being filed or not will depend on the circumstances and I think that the line between just a homicide and a murder can be pretty thin...how we describe our INTENT could be what pushes it one way or the other (which is likely why any decent attorney will tell you to keep your mouth shut in such a situation other than to say that you were in fear for your life).

[Guest NYCrulesU]

DaddyO has it, some of the above posts would seriously work against any defense you needed in an actual SD shooting. Just because the DA does not wish to prosecute does not mean that a family cannot try to dig up enough dirt and have an attorney present the findings to the DA to pursue the charges. You shoot to stop the threat period, no more and no less. Weather the perp lives or dies is irrelevant. Once there is not an immediate threat to life or serious bodily injury, you have lost your legal defense.

The fact that you live alone and no witnesses, well when that statement is found you are left with no witnesses to give merit to the fact that you did not just finish the perp off. At that point, the burden is on you to prove that you did not do just that.

I can hear it now

“As you can see the Defendant has clearly stated that he would murder anyone who dare broke into his home. He has, of his own accord made the statement that he would finish off someone and leave no witnesses. These are not the words of a man in fear, but of a man intent on taking a life in cold blood.”

Nowhere did I say murder..you did. And I said for daring to break into my home? I think not. I said kill, in defense of my life and my family's lives. Kill is not murder. Look up the word "intent".

I would and will kill an individual in self defense..IF that individual posed a threat to my or my family's lives. If he broke in, stole my tv and split? Screw 'em. Tv can be replaced. Not really sure why this is so difficult for some of you to grasp. I mean...if guy breaks into your home and you feel that you are in imminent danger...and you want to tickle fight him...by all means. Go right ahead.

BGs in my house at 2am is not there to do laundry. With children in the house I have every reason to believe that they are there to commit a crime of violence...they've already used force to gain entry. At that point "imminent danger" stands. Sucks to be BG.

As usual, some of you make the simplest things entirely too difficult lol. I guess the young mom in OK (if I recall the state correctly) should have not cut the intruder down with a shotgun and killed him dead on the spot as soon as his foot entered the front doorway. According to some of you...by her calm demeanor and admitting on camera she would do ANYTHING to protect her child..and even calling 911 to ask if should could kilm him...she clearly must have comitted murder huh?

I pray some of you never have to be in a critical situation. With the thinking I see here you probably wouldn't make it. No fortitude. No resolve.

Some of you should learn the difference between premeditation and mindset.....before getting all nervous nelly and weak in the knees.

Edited February 1, 2012 by NYCrulesU

[daddyo]

Nowhere did I say murder..you did. And I said for daring to break into my home? I think not. I said kill, in defense of my life and my family's lives. Kill is not murder. Look up the word "intent".

I would and will kill an individual in self defense..IF that individual posed a threat to my or my family's lives. If he broke in, stole my tv and split? Screw 'em. Tv can be replaced. Not really sure why this is so difficult for some of you to grasp. I mean...if guy breaks into your home and you feel that you are in imminent danger...and you want to tickle fight him...by all means. Go right ahead.

BGs in my house at 2am is not there to do laundry. With children in the house I have every reason to believe that they are there to commit a crime of violence...they've already used force to gain entry. At that point "imminent danger" stands. Sucks to be BG.

As usual, some of you make the simplest things entirely too difficult lol. I guess the young mom in OK (if I recall the state correctly) should have not cut the intruder down with a shotgun and killed him dead on the spot as soon as his foot entered the front doorway. According to some of you...by her calm demeanor and admitting on camera she would do ANYTHING to protect her child..and even calling 911 to ask if should could kilm him...she clearly must have comitted murder huh?

I pray some of you never have to be in a critical situation. With the thinking I see here you probably wouldn't make it. No fortitude. No resolve.

Wow. Just wow.

Edited February 1, 2012 by DaddyO

[QuietDan]

Some of the folks on this forum are military or former military or retired military. And, some of the folks on this forum are police or former police or retired. And, some of the folks on this forum are none of the above. We might all have trouble getting into each other's heads on this issue, in part, because of that.

IMO:

Dealing with a threat in a foreign war zone and dealing with a threat in a domestic civil environment are exactly the same -- and completely different.

I'm thinking some of the back and forthing on this issue comes from different perspectives and different backgrounds.

In a foreign war zone -- 'stopping the threat' and 'kill' are very close to exactly the same thing.

In a domestic civil environment -- 'stopping the threat' and 'kill' are two different things, even if it's just in the shooter's head, and even if the result is the same.

I'm not saying this is the be all and end all to the back and forthing, but I do think this is a part of it.

[Hershmeister]

I am truly astonished at the posts and more importantly the foolishness of making public comments like this.

[Guest pfries]

Nowhere did I say murder..you did. And I said for daring to break into my home? I think not. I said kill, in defense of my life and my family's lives. Kill is not murder. Look up the word "intent".

If you read the post those are the words of a potential prosecutor And I promise the prosecutor would use the term murder.

I guess the young mom in OK (if I recall the state correctly) should have not cut the intruder down with a shotgun and killed him dead on the spot as soon as his foot entered the front doorway. According to some of you...by her calm demeanor and admitting on camera she would do ANYTHING to protect her child..and even calling 911 to ask if should could kilm him...she clearly must have comitted murder huh?

IIRC The young mother asked if she could shoot, the intruder not kill the intruder, quite a difference.

I pray some of you never have to be in a critical situation. With the thinking I see here you probably wouldn't make it. No fortitude. No resolve.

As far as critical situation, you have no idea of my background and with the mentality you are displaying I would not want to be around you in a critical situation.

Good day NYCrulesU

[Mike.357]

Stopping and killing are exactly the same sight picture.

That maybe true and if he dies as a result all i was trying to do was stop the threat.

I am not an executioner.

[Guest bkelm18]

Nowhere did I say murder..you did. And I said for daring to break into my home? I think not. I said kill, in defense of my life and my family's lives. Kill is not murder. Look up the word "intent".

I would and will kill an individual in self defense..IF that individual posed a threat to my or my family's lives. If he broke in, stole my tv and split? Screw 'em. Tv can be replaced. Not really sure why this is so difficult for some of you to grasp. I mean...if guy breaks into your home and you feel that you are in imminent danger...and you want to tickle fight him...by all means. Go right ahead.

BGs in my house at 2am is not there to do laundry. With children in the house I have every reason to believe that they are there to commit a crime of violence...they've already used force to gain entry. At that point "imminent danger" stands. Sucks to be BG.

As usual, some of you make the simplest things entirely too difficult lol. I guess the young mom in OK (if I recall the state correctly) should have not cut the intruder down with a shotgun and killed him dead on the spot as soon as his foot entered the front doorway. According to some of you...by her calm demeanor and admitting on camera she would do ANYTHING to protect her child..and even calling 911 to ask if should could kilm him...she clearly must have comitted murder huh?

I pray some of you never have to be in a critical situation. With the thinking I see here you probably wouldn't make it. No fortitude. No resolve.

Some of you should learn the difference between premeditation and mindset.....before getting all nervous nelly and weak in the knees.

Are you really being condescending towards those of us that choose to take our training and legal advice seriously? Really? A self defense situation (or critical situation as you choose to call it) isn't like going out for ice cream. Calling those folks who take it seriously "nervous nellies" is childish and quite frankly slightly mall ninja-ish. You are sounding like the type of person that shoots first, asks questions later. A dangerous mindset to have. Good luck with all that.

Edited February 1, 2012 by bkelm18

[Fourtyfive]

Dang , did I start all this ?

[Guest nicemac]

What you seem not to understand is that everything you put-on the internet is public and forever. So you shoot someone next weekend in self-defense. The prosecutor finds this post (and they will search for your internet activity). You will have a hard time convincing anyone that your intention was to stop the threat after they read this thread. It looks like you are hell-bent on killing the bg because he was in your house in the middle of the night. I think everyone here so far agrees that if you shoot the bg in your house and he happens to die, well too bad–we could care less.

But the intention has to be only to "stop the threat" or you could wind up doing some serious time for killing him.

[daddyo]

Dang , did I start all this ?

Yes, it's all your fault.

[Fourtyfive]

Needless to say , but if threatened in my house in the middle of the night , yes I will fear for my life and yes I will stop the threat , it is my right. I think all will agree.

[mikegideon]

That maybe true and if he dies as a result all i was trying to do was stop the threat.

I am not an executioner.

Me neither. We agree

[Guest NYCrulesU]

What you seem not to understand is that everything you put-on the internet is public and forever. So you shoot someone next weekend in self-defense. The prosecutor finds this post (and they will search for your internet activity). You will have a hard time convincing anyone that your intention was to stop the threat after they read this thread. It looks like you are hell-bent on killing the bg because he was in your house in the middle of the night. I think everyone here so far agrees that if you shoot the bg in your house and he happens to die, well too bad–we could care less.

But the intention has to be only to "stop the threat" or you could wind up doing some serious time for killing him.

I would say the same to a judge as I have here. If BG was in my house in the middle of the night and I felt the lives of anyone home was in imminent danger of death or severe bodily harm...I shoot to kill. If he doesn't die...lucky him. If he does...oh well. My point is, was and will be..I don't shoot to injure.

You all can try and be "slick" or cute with words by calling "stopping the threat .. wink, wink". I don't mince words.

[RobertNashville]

I would say the same to a judge as I have here. If BG was in my house in the middle of the night and I felt the lives of anyone home was in imminent danger of death or severe bodily harm...I shoot to kill. If he doesn't die...lucky him. If he does...oh well. My point is, was and will be..I don't shoot to injure.

You all can try and be "slick" or cute with words by calling "stopping the threat .. wink, wink". I don't mince words.

Yeah...good for you...good luck with that (and if you ever do shoot someone in a self-defense situation I think you'll need all the luck you can get given what you've said here).

I would also say that your anarchist avatar fits your attitude.

Edited February 1, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Fallguy]

Didn't read all the post (or all of the long first one for that matter)...don't have to, sure they are the same as in previous threads.

B

Plus probably thinking I need more range time.

[daddyo]

I would say the same to a judge as I have here. If BG was in my house in the middle of the night and I felt the lives of anyone home was in imminent danger of death or severe bodily harm...I shoot to kill. If he doesn't die...lucky him. If he does...oh well. My point is, was and will be..I don't shoot to injure.

You all can try and be "slick" or cute with words by calling "stopping the threat .. wink, wink". I don't mince words.

[Guest bkelm18]

I would say the same to a judge as I have here. If BG was in my house in the middle of the night and I felt the lives of anyone home was in imminent danger of death or severe bodily harm...I shoot to kill. If he doesn't die...lucky him. If he does...oh well. My point is, was and will be..I don't shoot to injure.

You all can try and be "slick" or cute with words by calling "stopping the threat .. wink, wink". I don't mince words.

You have issues, bud.

[Dennis1209]

Sorry guys, I didn't intend to open a can of worms. I proposed a scenario in my mind that most likely could occur in my dwelling. Having a plan of action after the fact, should it ever occur, is a must IMO. That includes possibly rendering aid to the scum bag and calling your lawyer.

Regardless of the law, I wanted to know what you would do for the scumbag that broke into your home if you were successfull in stopping the threat.

I never want to experience a situation like I described but, it occurs more and more frequently in our society today. Not just in the "hood" but everywhere. Drug addiction, home invasion, gang-banging, serial killing are the norm today. Everyday you become more likely to become a statistic of home invasion and violent crime. If you believe the governments statistic's you believe in Santa Clause. We have millions of convicted murderers, drug users, pedophiles, car jackers, thief's, pimps, etc. in prison. Everyday we have them re-entering society after their liberal sentence is complete. They're three times that walking our streets on probation, parole and have not been caught for their first offense yet.

This day and age isn't the 1950's I grew up in. Sure, there has always been murder and crime through out all of history. But, am I the only one who has witnessed an exponential explosion in heinous crimes in the last 20 years?

I'm a compassionate person of deserving people. I believe if you broke into my home you are not deserving of compassion and are not deserving of anything other than your own fate.

All interesting and thought provoking posts guys, thanks!

[Guest bkelm18]

Sorry guys, I didn't intend to open a can of worms. I proposed a scenario in my mind that most likely could occur in my dwelling. Having a plan of action after the fact, should it ever occur, is a must IMO. That includes possibly rendering aid to the scum bag and calling your lawyer.

Regardless of the law, I wanted to know what you would do for the scumbag that broke into your home if you were successfull in stopping the threat.

I never want to experience a situation like I described but, it occurs more and more frequently in our society today. Not just in the "hood" but everywhere. Drug addiction, home invasion, gang-banging, serial killing are the norm today. Everyday you become more likely to become a statistic of home invasion and violent crime. If you believe the governments statistic's you believe in Santa Clause. We have millions of convicted murderers, drug users, pedophiles, car jackers, thief's, pimps, etc. in prison. Everyday we have them re-entering society after their liberal sentence is complete. They're three times that walking our streets on probation, parole and have not been caught for their first offense yet.

This day and age isn't the 1950's I grew up in. Sure, there has always been murder and crime through out all of history. But, am I the only one who has witnessed an exponential explosion in heinous crimes in the last 20 years?

I'm a compassionate person of deserving people. I believe if you broke into my home you are not deserving of compassion and are not deserving of anything other than your own fate.

All interesting and thought provoking posts guys, thanks!

No it's an interesting thread with certainly some "interesting" opinions as far as self defense law is concerned.

[Guest pfries]

I stand with bkelm18 on this one.^^^

[billyscott]

Very good thread Dennis. To get back to your original question which was about rendering aid, I choose B.

I know that in any case where an Ambulance is called and violence is involved the Ambulance will "stage".

That means they will park nearby and wait till the scene is secured by the local LEOs. They won't go in and risk

their lives and I don't blame them. It's not their job.

And a man on the floor can still be a deadly threat if he pulls a gun out of his pocket and shoots at you.

And if someone breaks into your home and you confront him and he shoots you, do you think he is going to call 911 and stay and render aid to you till they get there?

Edited February 2, 2012 by billyscott

[TMF]

... our INTENT should be to stop the threat; not KILL the threat. The result may be identical but our intent shouldn't be...

^^^^^^ This is the single most important thing...INTENT

Shooting someone with the intent to kill is murder. There really is no way around that. Shooting someone with the intent of stopping a percieved threat is justifiable. The phrase "shoot to kill" suggests intent. Shooting to stop a threat isn't a "wink, wink and nod".... it is what it is; to stop a threat. It just so happens that it is acceptable to aim center mass in SD, which could result in death, but if the intent was to kill vs. stop then it is murder. Proving intent may not be so easy based on forensic evidence, but certainly expressing intent publically here would make a prosecuter's job very, very easy. I really hope for your sake that you don't have to use your weapon in a SD shoot because you'd be screwed.

Besides, your goal shouldn't be to kill. I'm not saying that you don't defend yourself, but when you say your goal is to kill the threat that suggests that you're doling out a punishment for home invasion rather than protecting yourself and your family. In your mind it may be simple as verbage, but in reality the verbage means everything.

Edited February 2, 2012 by TMF 18B