Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
7/8/2020 3:01:36 PM
Posted: 5/2/2009 9:38:21 AM EDT
I have to preface how this question came up between me and my buddy.

My wife was telling me of a very disturbing story she heard while we were just in California. She told me a couple months back that she had read a story of a man that dragged a small child out of his truck, stopped in the street and in front of onlookers proceeded to beat and stomp this small baby to death. Having a 5 month old baby girl, this story kinda hit home and left me with some horrific images in my mind. They said they couldnt even ID the child due to the severe trauma.

Anyways, a Sheriff's officer that happened to be airborn in a helicopter nearby, landed in a cow pasture next to him and couldnt get to him because of an electric fence between him and the scumbag.....so he just shot the guy dead. At least it ends on a happy note.

So I was talking with my buddy the other day and was telling him about the story and how it really bothered me. We always like to "what if" each other so he asks me what would I have done if I drove up on a scene like that. My first thought was that I would pull a three iron from the golf bag in the back of my truck and split the guys skull like a watermelon. So he says "just like that.....no hesitation?" I say "Of course....gladly".

So he says, "What if after you cave this guys grape in with your golf club, you realize the infant he was stomping to death was a cabbage patch doll?"





What would happen? Would you be legally justified in killing a guy that you thought was stomping a baby to death but it ended up being a doll?

I would think yes........
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:48:36 AM EDT
no

they dont let you go for killing a guy who wasnt doing anything illegal


and you think about some weird shit

Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:51:42 AM EDT
Well then think before you act.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:55:41 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:55:59 AM EDT
Jackass or Scare Tactics type shows pop into mind.

I hate that stuff.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:56:12 AM EDT
let me be the first to say





LOL,   WUT?
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:58:24 AM EDT
LOL....I SAID it was a weird question. I didnt think about it.....my friend did.

So the cop was justified shooting the guy from 30 feet away only because it actually was a child? Its not that I wouldnt have thought before acting.......I would have thought the guy was killing a small child and I needed to act to save it.

Jeez....just axing.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 9:58:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2009 10:08:24 AM EDT by EternalVigilance]
EDIT: I read the OP wrong...thought you were asking if it would be ok if you executed the fucker on the side of the road after finding the dead child.

Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:00:09 AM EDT
I think the litmus test is would a "reasonable" person have acted the same.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:01:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Harvster:
let me be the first to say





LOL,   WUT?


this
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:01:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2009 10:07:21 AM EDT by EternalVigilance]
Originally Posted By MINOBARN:
Jackass or Scare Tactics type shows pop into mind.

I hate that stuff.


Yeah, I have had a lot to say about that stupid ass show in the past when my wife was watching it.  LoL.


It would be a tragedy, but if someone tried to pull a "scare tactics" on you and you used a firearm to defend yourself (firing shots or not), you would get off.  The requirement (at least in my state, but in all of them probably) is that you have to be able to show that a reasonable person would have been in fear for their life (or anothers).  In the end, it doesn't matter if you were mistaken.

That is why that show is fucking stupid.  Just about every episode I've seen the "victim" would be legally protected if they used up to and including deadly force to stop the actor.




eta:  In the scenario with the cabbage patch doll, your prosecution would hinge upon whether or not the jury determined that a "reasonable person" would have assumed that the cabbage patch doll was a real child.
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:03:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2009 10:04:17 AM EDT by juni4ling]
Yeah, it is kind of a weird scenario...

But in Utah, you might be OK...

They have some pretty liberal use of force laws... Probably the most liberal use of force laws in the entire country...The guy is in public, stops on a public street, he is obviously trying to cause a stir, you thought it was a baby...

The only way they will stick you in Utah is if you realize it was a doll...And continue to kill (or hurt) the guy....And they can prove that you knew it was only a doll...

Yeah, I am going to say (given your scenario) that even if it goes to trial, you will have pretty good luck with a Utah jury.

A cop...Yeah, I am going to go with that they will be OK in the scenario, because they will claim a duty to protect the life of the child (what they believe was a child) and did everything in their power to stop the violence against the kid. Cops get off all the time from doing the wrong thing when they can prove that in their heart of hearts they thought they were following polcy/trying to do their duty...

But you do think of weird things, my friend...
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:03:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2009 10:04:41 AM EDT by Herrin811]
the cops might not let you go, but a jury might



What i read reminds me of cops shooting a civvy with a cell-phone.....Justified??? IMHO, yes......Violent act, non-compliance, sudden movement, dark object, etc so forth....In the moment, do what you gotta do....


In the end-murder 1, doubtful....Some lesser grade of manslaughter.....Probably
Link Posted: 5/2/2009 10:13:19 AM EDT
Well I looked up the story.

Apparently it happened in Modesto CA. I was hoping it was some kinda National Enquirer story.

I just dont get it.
Top Top