Oregon Intervening Terrorist with Fire ?

[crunchytaco]

The tragic attack on elderly rally participants by an illegal with fire bombs was alarming. I wonder if intervention, before LEOs arriving, by a legal carry Samaritan would have compounded the crimes or be considered life saving by authorities. WWYD?

Read More

 

[Camelfilter]

A bad guy doesn't need to have a firearm, for use lethal force to be justifiable.

What would *I* have done? No idea, I wasn't there.

 

[1775usmc]

If someone is lighting people on fire or attempting to do so that is a green light for use of force. Same goes for someone coming after you with a needle, hammer, or baseball bat.

I highly suggest people inform themselves on when you are allowed to used deadly force and when it is appropriate. CHL courses do a terrible job of laying out legalities and the internet is a terrible place of opinions. Many of which will land you in jail or dead.

Like @Camelfilter said. I wasn't there either. And I'm not going to say what I would/would not have done.

 

[Koda]

The tragic attack on elderly rally participants by an illegal with fire bombs was alarming. I wonder if intervention, before LEOs arriving, by a legal carry Samaritan would have compounded the crimes or be considered life saving by authorities. WWYD?

If you dont know when your legally privileged to use force on someone you should read the book The Law Of Self Defense by Andrew Branca.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Looking at the videos this one seems pretty simple to me. Guy walking around with molatovs. He needs to both light and throw it. The mental trigger(s) to take action with a firearm to stop the threat is pretty obvious imo.

However the key being when did you notice the attack? When are you in position to do something about it etc. ? chances are you aren't standing right next to the guy and looking his way when he starts the attack.

You would probably see smoke in the distance and wonder what the hell is going on like most poeple. Or perhaps you hear a guy yelling in the distance and wonder what the F is going on. I would say it happens near me roughly once a week or 2 weeks at the most. Some meth head ina "violent confrontation" with someone in his imagination. Happened 2 days ago. Lady screaming at the top of her lungs. Around here people are numb to such things cuz it happens so often and observing from a distance to see if it's something you even need to worry about is probably the first step.

If you happen to be standing near by the guy and are in condition yellow you could do something about it before the first attack. If you notice something going on a ways away from you, and you go investigate a situation already underway, you would have to accurately assess what is going on (condition orange), then take action if your mental trigger is reached.

Accurately assessing what is really going on can be hard to do sometimes and it can take time. IMO you have to decide for you ahead of time what situations will you engage in and what you won't. Fe domestic dispute, gang banger on gang banger, mass shooter, man harming a child, robbery, direct threat to you or your family, whatever. Hopefully everyone has a list of what they will engage or not engage in ahead of time. It varies by each person I think. All imo and "standing on the shoulders of giants" like Jeff cooper, Clint smith and others but also personal experience witnessing 3 armed carjackings (all knives, not guns), 1 stabbing, and one assault on me personally.

 

[1775usmc]

If you dont know when your legally privileged to use force on someone you should read the book The Law Of Self Defense by Andrew Branca.

If an individual does not know when deadly force is permitted and is unable to articulate why they used the level of force they did…. Then they should not be carrying a gun. It's a liability.

 

[hker71]

If an individual does not know when deadly force is permitted and is unable to articulate why they used the level of force they did…. Then they should not be carrying a gun. It's a liability.

100% what 177usmc says! If you don't know, don't do it.

I told my father-in-law he shouldn't purchase a firearm since he couldn't decide if he could or should use it if the need arises. It just adds to the problem.

 

[Mathias]

The tragic attack on elderly rally participants by an illegal with fire bombs was alarming. I wonder if intervention, before LEOs arriving, by a legal carry Samaritan would have compounded the crimes or be considered life saving by authorities. WWYD?

I dont understand the focus on selfpreservation by gun owners who should be using their tool to save lives. But most of you are concernened with if it was legal to stop the terrorist with your firearm instead of saving people. USE YOUR GUN TO STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING OTHERS. Instead you're worried about court. Why do you carry?

 

[Lilhigbee]

I carry to have the means to protect myself and my family. I DO NOT carry to interject myself into circumstances I know nothing about and where guessing wrong will ruin my life.
If cocktail-boy is near me with his BS he is a threat to me. Otherwise, not my problem.

 

[CountryGent]

Bad guy in Colorado attacked with molotov cocktails. Gee, wonder if they were NFA registered? Another resounding gun control success story!

 

[1775usmc]

100% what 177usmc says! If you don't know, don't do it.

I told my father-in-law he shouldn't purchase a firearm since he couldn't decide if he could or should use it if the need arises. It just adds to the problem.

My dad is the same way. When I turned 21 we went to a CHL course together. He let his expire. When I asked him why he basically said he was unsure if he would be willing to pull the trigger and potentially end another's life. So he saw himself as a liability.

I respect my Dad in a huge way for owning that. In no way do I look down on his decision. We have different view points on taking a life if needed and that's ok.

The scary thing is there are alot of people who don't know the legalities or have even have had the conversation of taking another life. And they are out there carrying because their pride has gotten in the way.

 

[TTSX]

I dont understand the focus on selfpreservation by gun owners who should be using their tool to save lives. But most of you are concernened with if it was legal to stop the terrorist with your firearm instead of saving people. USE YOUR GUN TO STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING OTHERS. Instead you're worried about court. Why do you carry?

To keep myself alive. Don't really care about the others, they certainly don't care about me. I'm not paying tens of hundreds of thousands of dollars, doing jail time with my new girlfriend Jamal and losing my rights to save someone else. Not a cop, not a soldier, not my job to run toward the danger on other's behalf.

 

[1775usmc]

I dont understand the focus on selfpreservation by gun owners who should be using their tool to save lives. But most of you are concernened with if it was legal to stop the terrorist with your firearm instead of saving people. USE YOUR GUN TO STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING OTHERS. Instead you're worried about court. Why do you carry?

It's not my job to save other people.

I carry a gun to protect the ones I love and myself.

That's why I carry.

 

[nammac]

The tragic attack on elderly rally participants by an illegal with fire bombs was alarming. I wonder if intervention, before LEOs arriving, by a legal carry Samaritan would have compounded the crimes or be considered life saving by authorities. WWYD?

It was a "gun free" zone. So no opportunity to use a firearm to stop the bad guy…

 

[Koda]

I dont understand the focus on selfpreservation by gun owners who should be using their tool to save lives. But most of you are concernened with if it was legal to stop the terrorist with your firearm instead of saving people. USE YOUR GUN TO STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING OTHERS. Instead you're worried about court. Why do you carry?

If you shoot the firebomb guy but get convicted of murder was it worth it?

 

[nammac]

I dont understand the focus on selfpreservation by gun owners who should be using their tool to save lives. But most of you are concernened with if it was legal to stop the terrorist with your firearm instead of saving people. USE YOUR GUN TO STOP PEOPLE FROM KILLING OTHERS. Instead you're worried about court. Why do you carry?

I carry to protect me and my loved ones. If others have decided not to carry a firearm, I'm not responsible for their protection. That's their decision, not mine. And their bad decision shouldn't impact my life.

 

[monkeybutler]

The tragic attack on elderly rally participants by an illegal with fire bombs was alarming. I wonder if intervention, before LEOs arriving, by a legal carry Samaritan would have compounded the crimes or be considered life saving by authorities. WWYD?

If somebody had shot, or otherwise neutralized the attacker, am sure he/she/it would face minor legal annoyance before the facts were fully understood. But they would be broadly regarded as a hero.

 

[1775usmc]

If somebody had shot, or otherwise neutralized the attacker, am sure he/she/it would face minor legal annoyance before the facts were fully understood. But they would be broadly regarded as a hero.

Was Daniel Penny broadly regarded as a hero? How about Kyle Rittenhouse?

 

[monkeybutler]

Was Daniel Penny broadly regarded as a hero? How about Kyle Rittenhouse?

Different circumstances. Each case is judged by its own merit. I was only talking about this case.

 

[1775usmc]

Different circumstances. Each case is judged by its own merit. I was only talking about this case.

Fair enough. Not sure how it would have been viewed. Maybe differently due to the current administration. Colorado isn't exactly 2A friendly and doesn't stand with the current administration generally speaking….

I guess we will never know.