Mike1234567
member
Yeah, but fists against bullets CAN land you in prison unless you're literally in a wheel chair. Sad but true.
So where does this fit? ("Knockout Game")
- Thread starter herrwalther
- Start date
- Status
Mainsail
Member
I saw a video this morning on this phenomenon(?).
It looked to me like the attacker had some friends shooting video, possibly asking for help from the victim. While the victim was engaged one of them flanked him knocked him down.
The lesson seems to be, watch your blind side. Don't get so focused that you miss someone on your periphery advancing.
Also, let's not forget these situations are dynamic, so don't think you can fix a plan for all scenarios. One thing I learned in flying is that it never goes like the experts said it would, or how you envisioned it should. In other words, being alert is the best preparation. You also don't need to think of this as a draw-and-shoot situation either- there are many shades of gray at your disposal. A hand on your holstered gun with a command voice will likely be all that you need to do.
It looked to me like the attacker had some friends shooting video, possibly asking for help from the victim. While the victim was engaged one of them flanked him knocked him down.
The lesson seems to be, watch your blind side. Don't get so focused that you miss someone on your periphery advancing.
Also, let's not forget these situations are dynamic, so don't think you can fix a plan for all scenarios. One thing I learned in flying is that it never goes like the experts said it would, or how you envisioned it should. In other words, being alert is the best preparation. You also don't need to think of this as a draw-and-shoot situation either- there are many shades of gray at your disposal. A hand on your holstered gun with a command voice will likely be all that you need to do.
If you saw it coming and took action during the interview, this does seem likely to work.
"watch your blind side ... it never goes like the experts said it would, or how you envisioned it should."
words of wisdom.
the hard part to any engagement is that we can never know what is in the other person's mind. so we can only judge them by their behavior and actions.
no doubt if a teenager is shot while doing this kind of stuff - it wont go well for the shooter in court. Lawyers will be all over this kind of incident. but this is a good example of where real situations are hard to judge, and they can develop very quickly.
I'm not gonna' get too excited about it - because out here in Los Angeles I don't know anyone who has been a victim of something like this. so it can't be too prevalent. fortunately, these kinds of dumb fads with teenagers usually don't last too long - they move onto something else.
CA R
words of wisdom.
the hard part to any engagement is that we can never know what is in the other person's mind. so we can only judge them by their behavior and actions.
no doubt if a teenager is shot while doing this kind of stuff - it wont go well for the shooter in court. Lawyers will be all over this kind of incident. but this is a good example of where real situations are hard to judge, and they can develop very quickly.
I'm not gonna' get too excited about it - because out here in Los Angeles I don't know anyone who has been a victim of something like this. so it can't be too prevalent. fortunately, these kinds of dumb fads with teenagers usually don't last too long - they move onto something else.
CA R
Stay away from gang areas, if you can. But bus stops and the like can be dangerous places.
If you have to go there, get in and get out quickly.
Do not act like a victim.
Watch for what may be developing situations; do not relax for a moment.
React appropriately and without hesitation.
Carry less than lethal defensive devices, a walking stick, and a firearm, if you are so permitted.
Know how to use them.
Where I live, it is unlawful to carry firearms on public transportation. I therefore avoid using public transpiration.
If you have to go there, get in and get out quickly.
Do not act like a victim.
Watch for what may be developing situations; do not relax for a moment.
React appropriately and without hesitation.
Carry less than lethal defensive devices, a walking stick, and a firearm, if you are so permitted.
Know how to use them.
Where I live, it is unlawful to carry firearms on public transportation. I therefore avoid using public transpiration.
Last edited:
Bobson
Member
The fact that one person is being attacked by three or four other people is basis enough to reasonably expect severe bodily injury, minimum.
I'll take my chances in court rather than hoping my attackers are only going to knock me unconcious because they're merely playing a game. To do otherwise, and especially to encourage others to do otherwise, is foolish and reckless.
This is a gamble either way, and everyone needs to decide how to handle it for himself. Knowing the law in your state is, as always, of the utmost importance.
Last edited:
Disparity of force is a relevant factor in use of force justification in all states.
But that has to do with ability, and the question was about intent. And it can be an uphill fight.
It was in your state of Arizona that Larry Hickey drew a firearm and wounded one of three attackers who were already beating him senseless with their fists. He went through two grueling and expensive trials and spent quite a spell in jail.
Even if the investigators, the charging authority, and the triers of fact could be counted upon to find the use of force to have been justified in an attack by multiple violent criminal actors, the victim of a knock out game faces a real practical problem: before the punch is thrown, and it will likely be thrown by surprise, the defender may have a real problem in presenting evidence of imminent danger and immediate necessity. And the objective of the knockout game is to disable the victim with one punch.
I have to wonder about the wisdom of anyone who carries only lethal defensive gear.
Now, my Blackthorn walking stick is in fact a bludgeon, and it therefore constitutes a lethal weapon, but I have found that carrying it serves as an effective deterrent in many instances.
My bold.
Pay attention to your surroundings at all times. Avoid known problem areas.
Totally random attacks like this are hard to stop, unless you are aware enough to see them coming a few precious seconds before it happens, or are able to recognize a bad situation coming and are able to veer to avoid it.
This "game" is a scary thing.
Mike1234567
member
This is not the norm... hit from behind is the norm from these thugs...
I agree that being watchful from the corner of your eye is important but.................
armoredman
Member
Yes. Mr Hickey was finally released in 2010, and all charges dropped. In 2009 a bill was signed into law here in AZ called defensive display, to give us more options.
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00421.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS
I believe this law is untested in court at this time, but it is yet another tool we now have available for attacks such as these IF the subject can see the attack coming. I agree wholeheartedly, as one who spends 8 hours a day surrounded by violent felons, situational awareness is critical to survival - act like a victim, be a victim.
andrewdl007
Member
I live in NYC and work in the news business so I've been following this for a while. What worries me is even if I was trying to be aware of my surroundings, sometimes the attacker runs up from behind the victim on their own and strikes. Even if I was carrying and aware I still might not be able to do anything and if knocked out, the attacker could have the possibility to take my gun. I have been interested that at least the attacks on tape do not show the attackers robbing the victims.
Mike1234567
member
I think that will change....
Deaf Smith
Member
Well let them try this 'knockout' game in Texas.
I predict some will end up in the morgue trying such stupidity.
We do have STG laws and folks do pack guns here.
We have this 'an armed society is a polite society' thing. And this knockout game is very impolite.
And that is probably why you don't hear of it happening in Texas.
Very very unwise to do it down here.
Deaf
I predict some will end up in the morgue trying such stupidity.
We do have STG laws and folks do pack guns here.
We have this 'an armed society is a polite society' thing. And this knockout game is very impolite.
And that is probably why you don't hear of it happening in Texas.
Very very unwise to do it down here.
Deaf
Considering the relatively low % of the population with a license in Texas, probably due in large part to how ridiculously difficult and expensive a CHL is to obtain, there are surely far more dangerous states for this than Texas.
They really need to be careful if Arizona, Vermont, Wyoming, South Dakota, Indiana, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and the like.
Deaf Smith
Member
Didn't say Texas was the most 'dangerous' state.
But Texas recognizes every other states CCW and allows them to pack heat here.
And lots of people pack here sans CHL to as guns are quite common.
Plus not every state has a STG law as Texas does.
Deaf
But Texas recognizes every other states CCW and allows them to pack heat here.
And lots of people pack here sans CHL to as guns are quite common.
Plus not every state has a STG law as Texas does.
Deaf
Lots of other states recognize every other state's permits.
As for the bold...that doesn't seem like a good thing...it seems to very very strongly reinforce what I said about the CHL process being ridiculously expensive and difficult.
I'd hate to have to use an illegally possessed firearm in self defense!
Deaf Smith
Member
Hmm. I've had my CHL since CHL first came here (taught classes for 10 years to.)
I think $140 for first time and then $70 for renewals. Geezers get it for $70/$35 (that is 60 years old or older.)
Then there is the instructor fee which varies from 50 bucks to 100. Around here $75 is the going price for the class.
That is not all that horribly expensive (price a gun and ammo and you will see what I mean.)
Sure we recognize every other states CCW. We want them to spend money in Texas.
And the CHL will allow you to buy guns from dealers and no NICS snoop.
Good thing is, in the classes they do teach you alot of things most people never even consider when just buying a gun and packing.
Deaf
I think $140 for first time and then $70 for renewals. Geezers get it for $70/$35 (that is 60 years old or older.)
Then there is the instructor fee which varies from 50 bucks to 100. Around here $75 is the going price for the class.
That is not all that horribly expensive (price a gun and ammo and you will see what I mean.)
Sure we recognize every other states CCW. We want them to spend money in Texas.
And the CHL will allow you to buy guns from dealers and no NICS snoop.
Good thing is, in the classes they do teach you alot of things most people never even consider when just buying a gun and packing.
Deaf
Nobody should have to pay $240 + take a day off from their responsibilities in order to exercise a "Right" [on a limited basis, since you have to hide it, God forbid somebody know you had a handgun in Texas]
I've been licensed 4 times by 3 different states and I still haven't spent that much, nor have I had to sacrifice any of my time
But we are definitely off topic now
I've been licensed 4 times by 3 different states and I still haven't spent that much, nor have I had to sacrifice any of my time
But we are definitely off topic now
1-1 Banger
Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 104
Like others have said, I think the best defense to this is old fashioned situational awareness. Being proactive instead of reactive as my old squad leader used to say would be as good a deterrent as any, especially considering that the "people" doing this are probably cowards at heart, I doubt they will continue once they realize the jig is up. If they do, all I can say without getting into inappropriate ramblings, is that they had better hope they knock me out with that first suckerpunch 
Kleanbore said:
Your interpretations of this particular example as well as others like it, going from memory in the latter cases, are very much in contradiction with a good deal of formal instruction I have had from top-tier trainers (whose names come up regularly on this board), as well as a class I paid for with a successful criminal defense attorney who gave multiple supporting examples, not to mention the resulting crosstalk from other legal types who were at both classes.
I don't know how else to say this. I seriously think you need to lay off the dispensing of legal pseudo-advice. It is very true that there is a need for nuance and that this entire area of discussion/inquiry is one that's rife with misinterpretation, but I truly think you have swung completely in the other direction and while I seem to remember you may be involved with a law office in some capacity, I am almost completely sure you are not a lawyer and I don't find it remotely appropriate for you to be making cocksure statements advising strangers on nuanced matters in such a dismissive, single-faceted way, in almost every thread.
That's my 2 cents. It's been coming for a while.
Last edited:
I too have taken a good deal of formal instruction, the most notable being Massad Ayoob's MAG-20. I am considering attending it again so I can ask about this subject, which is an extremely serious one.
Based on what you said about your own knowledge, you are no doubt well aware that ability, in the context of use of force law, relates either to the possession of a weapon (and reasonable belief concerning same can count) or a disparity of force.
We have been over a similar discussion ("a punch can kill") many times here, and we know that while that statement is certainly true, most fit defenders who are not outnumbered will have little luck in relying on that fact alone in a defense of justification. The Larry Hickey case serve as a stark illustration of that.
Of course, as always, it would be up to a jury to decide, if the judge so allows.
You are correct in remembering that I have stated that I am not a attorney. It is also true that I have more knowledge on the general subject of use of force law than many practicing attorneys.
That said, I do not "dispense advice" of any kind. If anyone here wants legal advice, he or she needs to consult his or her own attorney, in private. Nothing on a public board or in a book can be considered legal advice.
The only personal use to which I have put my knowledge is to decide which of the criminal defense attorneys I have interviewed will never represent me.
The link I provided here in the above post is available to all who have Internet access. It is not a personal interpretation. It is extremely relevant to the discussion.
You will note that I have penned a number of "stickies" in ST&T. I can assure you that every one of them was vetted by at least one attorney before it ever saw the light of day.
Your post here comes close to personal criticism, which should be handled by personal message, but that's okay on this one. The problem is that you have not offered a single constructive opinion on the subject, or any basis for one. Are you trying to suggest that a single punch, thrown at a fit person of size and age comparable to that of the offender, would likely be considered to constitute deadly force in a court of law? That was the subject of the post to which you responded.
If you would like to read something rather relevant that addresses the use of deadly force against unarmed assailants, with real examples, read this. It is excellent.
It is written by a practicing attorney, but it does not constitute legal advice.
I think it may well be the case, and I think you will likely agree, that some potential victims, depending upon their size and condition, have a great deal more to be concerned about from the kind of punch usually thrown in "the knockout game" than would others. Would deadly force be justified? That would remain to be seen.
The problem, as I see it, is that the objective of the "game" is to disable with a single punch thrown by surprise. How would any defender present evidence of a reasonable knowledge of jeopardy in advance?
Something to think about.
One Other Possible Tactic
One of the difficulties of a sudden attack that takes place at a very close distance is the inability of the defender to draw timely.
Some time back, I saw a piece on TV in which Massad Ayoob demonstrated the use of a concealed hammer snub nose revolver fired from a jacket pocket. The scenario shown was one in which avoidance of the close quarters situation was not practical.
The defender keeps one hand in the pocket and on the revolver.
Good idea? What do you think?
One disadvantage that comes to mind is that by not drawing the gun, the defender cannot rely upon last-second deterrence, and shots may be more likely to be fired.
Of course, this only comes into play when any questions about the use of deadly force have been properly answered.
Would it be unreasonable to consider carrying a pocket revolver in addition to a holstered firearm?
One of the difficulties of a sudden attack that takes place at a very close distance is the inability of the defender to draw timely.
Some time back, I saw a piece on TV in which Massad Ayoob demonstrated the use of a concealed hammer snub nose revolver fired from a jacket pocket. The scenario shown was one in which avoidance of the close quarters situation was not practical.
The defender keeps one hand in the pocket and on the revolver.
Good idea? What do you think?
One disadvantage that comes to mind is that by not drawing the gun, the defender cannot rely upon last-second deterrence, and shots may be more likely to be fired.
Of course, this only comes into play when any questions about the use of deadly force have been properly answered.
Would it be unreasonable to consider carrying a pocket revolver in addition to a holstered firearm?
Sure, it sounds nice, but...
I can't wear a jacket most of the year. It's too hot.
I believe in covering the trigger guard of a loaded handgun, if I pocket carry my revolver, I do so with a pocket holster, not just a loaded gun that is loose.
You would have to keep the jacket on all the time, even if you were doing something like sitting and eating at a restaurant...or not have the gun on your person and readily accessible (say you are at the restaurant, how well can you draw from it over the back of your chair, and if you go to use the restroom, do you leave your loaded gun unattended and out of your sight or do you put your jacket on every time you take your butt off of your chair?)...or possibly be unarmed as you leave your loaded gun somewhere else that isn't immediately accessible be you (unless you are carrying multiple guns, but even though, there is still the problem of not being able to have your jacket anywhere but on you)
5 shots doesn't seem like very many when faced with a group of attackers.
If your hand is in your pocket the whole time, you can't use it to protect yourself. You couldn't even cover up while stepping off the X or otherwise creating space prior to drawing/firing. It seems like you'd have to start shooting before you were even touched, or as some people would lable it, "just shoot the darling little kid because he's black and he got too close to you and you freaked out because you are a racist". And since this is a surprise kinda thing, you probably won't have your hand on the gun to begin with, which just means you'll have a slower draw than if you carried IWB/OWB + an inferior pistol. Unless you literally walk everywhere, all the time, with your hand on the gun. If your situational awareness alerts you ahead of time, I think that avoidance and creating/maintaining space will make it so that having a superior pistol in your waistband is still preferable.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked