What would have legal?

[hotSAUCE]

what would be legal?

This has never happened to me but watch a vid and got thinking. So heres the scenario:

Say you are walking down the street and you see a guy(or girl) getting beat up by like 2 or 3 people. Granted you have no clue why they are fighting. Person getting beat up is on the gound and has taken many blows to the point of not being able to defend themself. (Kicked in the head, punched, hit with road signs, etc). People are watching and no one is stepping in to stop the fight. So lets say you go in to attempt to break things up. When doing so one of the 3 people try and attack the vic again and you step in front. That person starts to swing at you.

*What legally can/would/should you do in this scenario if you had a firearm on you?

Read More

 

[Frankenrifle]

1) Call 911

2) Inform the aggressors that you have called 911

3) Tell the victim to get up and run to the nearest store/restaurant/populated area

4) Do not 'step in' the fight.

You've put yourself in grappling range, they may have knives, they already have shown they're willing to harm a person. In that situation there is a clear disparity of force...but...I'd keep your gun in your holster unless they start to move to engage you. So many legal ramifications of this situation.

Edit; You've made a huge mistake by closing the distance. You've made the victim of a beating and yourself into potential gun-shot victims and put a stolen gun onto the streets. I would never allow myself to get into a position where they would be able to disarm me. Unless you're running a holster with a couple points of retention you're gonna lose it if they start ground fighting with you.

 

[Phillyfan]

You can use lethal force if you feel someones life is in danger, I think this fits that bill as they are kicking in the head and the person is "not able to defend themself."

Totally hypothetical, but I would first attempt to stop the folks by getting in between and calming the situation down. If that didn't work I would pull the weapon.

 

[Phillyfan]

1) Call 911

2) Inform the aggressors that you have called 911

3) Tell the victim to get up and run to the nearest store/restaurant/populated area

4) Do not 'step in' the fight.

You've put yourself in grappling range, they may have knives, they already have shown they're willing to harm a person. In that situation there is a clear disparity of force...but...I'd keep your gun in your holster unless they start to move to engage you. So many legal ramifications of this situation.

Edit; You've made a huge mistake by closing the distance. You've made the victim of a beating and yourself into potential gun-shot victims and put a stolen gun onto the streets. I would never allow myself to get into a position where they would be able to disarm me. Unless you're running a holster with a couple points of retention you're gonna lose it if they start ground fighting with you.

Excellent points

 

[solv3nt]

161.205 Use of physical force generally. The use of physical force upon another person that would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances:

(1)(a) A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor or an incompetent person may use reasonable physical force upon such minor or incompetent person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of the minor or incompetent person.

(b) Personnel of a public education program, as that term is defined in section 1, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011, may use reasonable physical force upon a student when and to the extent the application of force is consistent with section 3, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011.

(2) An authorized official of a jail, prison or correctional facility may use physical force when and to the extent that the official reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order and discipline or as is authorized by law.

(3) A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under the direction of the person, may use physical force when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order, but the person may use deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.

(4) A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical self-injury may use physical force upon that person to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to thwart the result.

(5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971. [1971 c.743 §21; 1981 c.246 §1; 2011 c.665 §10]


161.209 Use of physical force in defense of a person. Except as provided in ORS 161.215 and 161.219, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]



161.215 Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:

(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that person; or

(2) The person is the initial aggressor, except that the use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force; or

(3) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law. [1971 c.743 §24]



161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or

(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or

(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

 

[Phillyfan]

The key here, for me, is the person can no longer defend themself and one more blow of the type you describe could very well kill them or cause irreversible damage. This is why I would go for the gun so quickly.

Of course, that is me sitting calmly at my desk with time to think about a hypothetical situation. What would happen in reality? Who know's.

 

[DeanfromOregon]

If they are unarmed youths of a darker skin tone that you, you can't win. The call 911, advise you called 911, and then protect yourself at all costs. Do not engage or go to it mano-a-mano.

 

[solv3nt]

Also, if you ever have to use a firearm to protect yourself or a third party, you will probably get sued by either the criminal or his family.

 

[Phillyfan]

A sad truth.

 

[PiratePast40]

So what if the person getting beat up was the "bad" gangster and the others were the "good" gangsters?

What if one of the guys was an undercover cop in the gang unit and you shoot him? What if you shoot and miss and the bullet hits a child in the house across the street? You have no frickin' idea who is who and it's really none of your business. For what it's worth, the number one concept that I took away from my CHL class was to stay out of other peoples s**t.

You can come up with endless scenarios and the end of the story is most allways the same, i.e., all of the pigs are muddy and nobody can tell the difference! We pay cops to play Superman, the rest of us can call 911 and report things unless we are directly involved. Seriously, what business do you have injecting yourself into a street fight?

 

[osterr1999]

I agree with Pirate. Call 911 and Observe and report. If they come at you, that's a different story, but I don't step in the middle of it.

 

[JAFO]

We can't answer your legal questions but your attorney can give you legal advice.

 

[308]

Like one who grabs a dog by the ears is he who meddles in a quarrel not his own
--Proverbs 26:17

 

[oknow]

Also, if you ever have to use a firearm to protect yourself or a third party, you will probably get sued by either the criminal or his family.

And unfortunately win

 

[Dunerunner]

Call the Police, pull out your phone and take pictures from a distance, advise the attackers you have called the police, be prepared to defend yourself, never allow them within ten feet of you, and if they do.....

Use common sense!! here's a good article.... <broken link removed>

 

[Misterbill]

what would be legal?

Person getting beat up is on the gound and has taken many blows to the point of not being able to defend themself. (Kicked in the head, punched, hit with road signs, etc). People are watching and no one is stepping in to stop the fight.

1. Kicked in the head with a shod foot is LETHAL force.
2. Person on the ground unable to defend themselves means whatever the circumstances, force is no longer legal for the assailants to use. At this point it's either 1st degree assault or attempted murder.

So lets say you go in to attempt to break things up.

Good for you, but know that physically intervening in that situation is likely to go very bad, very quickly. Violence of that type is mob violence once it gets to that point. There isn't a lot of thought happening. It's all instinct on the part of the attackers.

Personally I would shout LOUDLY to stop that I'm calling the cops and see what happens. If no one has intervened up to this point it's possible that someone simply saying something may stop the event. It's also much less likely to get the violence immediately turned on me.

When doing so one of the 3 people try and attack the vic again and you step in front. That person starts to swing at you.

*What legally can/would/should you do in this scenario if you had a firearm on you?

SHOULD is an impossible judgement call. It;'s so situationally dependent that no one can possibly tell you the answer.

LEGALLY, you can use lethal force to stop the attack on the person on the ground. Personally, I wouldn't even consider wading right into the middle of three people beating someone to death. That's just a really good way to wind up dead.

If I decided to physically intervene, I'd draw my gun. Three assailants in the circumstances you described are not going to be taken as anything BUT an imminent threat of grievous bodily injury (the necessary prerequisite for lethal force).

This is one of the very few circumstances in which I could imagine that a warning shot might be appropriate.

You're describing a really unusual scenario unless you're spending a lot of time hanging around gang-turf. I can't imagine why anyone would do so. Even if you LIVE in the hood, you don't hang out on the street unless you're an idiot looking for trouble.

But, assuming that lightning strikes and you see something like you described in the normal course of a non-trouble-maker's day, I've given you some thoughts.

Gaming out these situations too much in your head can be problematic. My strong advice is to stay very far away from too much "If X happens I will do Y" type of mental gaming. You can program yourself to the point that you will do "Y" given "X", even when there are other things present that make "Y" a VERY bad idea.

 

[Mark W.]

I try not to get out of my car when visiting Portland.

 

[hotSAUCE]

Oh I live in Bellevue WA and the only crime that I ever see is guys wearing skinny jeans and girls with ugly plastic surgery, lol

Not I have never seen this ever happen, but I watched some video on liveleaks.com of three black dudes beating the crap out of this other black dude. Fight looked to be pretty one sided where it went from the sidewalk to the middle of the street. (This happened in NY, btw). When it finally went into the street, people were just yelling "OMG SOMEONE NEEDS TO HELP THAT GUY OUT" or "STOP IT". So the 3 guys looked to be about 15-20 feet away since the 1 guy getting beat up was hardly moving at this point, a guy goes to check on the dude on the ground. as he is standing there, 1 of the guys starts walking back to the dude on the ground, where the good Samaritan tells the guys to stay back. Obvlusly the assailant doesn't care and continues back to the vic. Where now the samaritan, is looking at the assailant in the fact, and the assailant swings at the good samaritan. he gets hit twice, and the 3 dudes leaves.

let me try and find the vid

 

[hotSAUCE]

LiveLeak.com - Footage of Brutal 2010 NYC Beating Released During Trial

 

[hotSAUCE]

well bubblegum, I should have watched the whole vid, didn't see the cops show up and arrest the shirtless guy, haha