If this video had ended in deadly force... would it be justified?

[rogerjames]

OK. Several declarations need to be made here.

The video is a verbal/physical conflict with foul language.

I encountered this video on a local gun forum in the "lounge" area. The video itself is NOT RKBA related, however... the series of events that transpire could have very easily escalated to a "deadly force" situation and I am conflicted whether deadly force could have been justified.

I feel the "beat down" that was delivered was deserved without question.

Although the victim moved away from the instigator, he verbally engaged and escalated the situation both before and after changing seats, so my question is... if the victim was legally carrying and this ended with deadly force... would this be a justified shooting?

Here goes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjMPT6ZT03k

 

[NOLAEMT]

My guess, depending on where this took place, is that it could have been ruled justifiable. the older gentleman retreated from the other man, and the aggressor threw the first punch, is much younger, and it might be reasonable to guess that he faced a risk of being injured or killed. I believe the law usually applies to actions that escalate a situation, not words. I would think that rational adults can have an argument without it leading to violence.

 

[mrokern]

It's going to vary based on state law. Obviously it didn't get to a point where deadly force would have been justified, but here in MN, we have a "reluctant participant" requirement. By escalating the situation, the older gentleman lost his status, thereby losing a self-defense claim...BUT...

Here in MN we can also reclaim that status by blatantly disengaging from the situation. His movement to the front of the bus could have qualified, but he'd have been better off keeping his mouth shut from that point on, as any comments he made could cause a ruling that he was still escalating. It's unlikely that it would stand on appeal, but I'd prefer to not pay that much to any attorney.

Nobody ever died from a damaged ego.

-Mark

 

[jakemccoy]

First of all, who exactly is the victim here?

Regardless, to claim self-defense, the victim has to be without fault. Neither man is without fault. Listen to the whole thing and understand fully what is being said and what is physically happening. They are both instigating with words and/or with actions.

Further, I don't think either could convince a jury he had an imminent fear for his life. People get into fist fights on the streets, including public transportation. It happens. Someone may get beat down, but it's not an end-of-your-life situation. Both of these men appear to be sufficiently street savvy to understand this concept. Both of these men seem to be in reasonably good health. Had one of them been an old lady in cancer treatment, we'd have a more sympathetic jury. Anyway, neither is without fault in the first place.

 

[NOLAEMT]

I don't think lethal force was necessary in this situation, but as the younger man was walking up to the front of the bus, how was the older man to know he didn't have a weapon, etc.

Like others have said, both parties were at fault, I just think if it had ended up with the older man producing a gun/ using lethal force, it may have met the "reasonable fear of injury or death" that is in the law here, I don't know about other places.

He retreated as far as possible on a bus, and the man came up to him, after having an argument, in a very aggressive manner. I would say that I would be at least a little worried in that situation.

more importantly I think is the way the older man handled the situation leading up to the argument. Being level headed and not engaging people in arguments is an important part of carrying a weapon, and would probably have resolved any confrontation, and the need to make a decision on the use of lethal force.

 

[jakemccoy]

From either perspective, you couldn't carry a gun, get into such a juvenile argument, shoot the other person and then reasonably expect to be successful with a self-defense claim. You'd have to eliminate the juvenile argument from the scenario in order to be successful with a self-defense claim.

 

[Johnny Guest]

This is really fruitless

The OP himself admitted that this is off topic for this forum.

If you stretch the factr situation far enough, pracically ANY dispute or argument MIGHT progress to the use of firearms. This carries trhe hypothetical a bit too far.

CLOSED.