Yes, it WAS assault and battery, but would YOU have drawn?

[Vern Humphrey]

...but that conclusion has been carefully considered by those whose decisions count, for many centuries, and while it may be permissible to treat someone who is armed or who has a significant physical advantage that is known to the defender as a "deadly threat", one who reacts in the same way under other circumstances is very likely to end up in prison.

In other words, a bunch of <ptui!> lawyers sitting in padded chairs and not personally facting the threat, decided that's how it should be.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Could you explain why you think it wasn't?

Because Texas law doesn't have separate offenses for Assault and Battery. Threat and contact are both Assault.

Told you I was being pedantic.

 

[JB357MAG]

Hit me in the face, you see my gun. Thats it.

Jimmy

 

[nickn10]

I've been reading this thread from day one, it interests me because I've been in similar situations on quite a few occassions with different results. It is becoming obvious that there are those who have never been in a real hand to hand fight who's opinions are monday night quarterbacking, and those that have been in a win at all costs fight. For me posting the "results" of sitting on my computer and analyzing how I would handle it vs. what really happened when I got "into it" is completely different. Unless I'm different than most people, the only emotions I felt when the fight started was RAGE, consequences, other than avoiding getting beat, were not considered in the heat of battle. I'm much older now and can't successfully fight back against a younger stronger attacker. I know what damage can be done by them and that is the reason I carry and I will use it if necessary. I retired from the Colorado Dept of Corrections and I have first hand knowledge of how many men are in prison for killing someone in a fight. Yeah I know, turn the other cheek and walk away is the mature sane thing to do, but for me, living with that "cowardice" will eat me to death.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Vern Humphrey: In other words, a bunch of <ptui!> lawyers sitting in padded chairs and not personally facting the threat, decided that's how it should be.

Look: the fates of those who have been jailed or put to death for using deadly force against unarmed persons, and those who have been acquitted, were decided by trial juries. How many of the jurors do you think were attorneys? Hint: lawyers are not likely to be selected to serve on trial juries.

But let's get back to how it has been decided that either arms or a disparity of force impinge on the question of ability to cause death or great bodily harm: the legal principles involved have their roots in common law. The collective body of the common law was drawn up over the centuries by judges. I would not assume that they were not well versed in the actual use of force.

The English Common Law was adopted as the basis of law in all states but one, and in all US territories; I am very confident that the men who caused that to happen did not get into the position of being empowered to do so by "sitting in padded chairs."

But regardless of one's misconceptions about how the law came to be what it is, and regardless of how some people believe the law should read, the law is what it is, and those who choose to not abide by it do not fare well; they are commonly called outlaws.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by nickn10: It is becoming obvious that there are those who have never been in a real hand to hand fight who's opinions are monday night quarterbacking, and those that have been in a win at all costs fight.

Let's make it perfectly clear: the question has nothing to do with fighting. Fighting is against the law unless it occurs in strictly regulated circumstances.

The original question was whether it was proper for an individual to draw a firearm after having been stuck by a punch, when no shots were fired. We have discussed the fact that the laws vary among states.

We have also discussed whether it is wise to draw a firearm in a crowd.

I'm much older now and can't successfully fight back against a younger stronger attacker.

We have also discussed the important concept of a disparity of force. The circumstances of smaller, older, unfit persons, females threatened by males, and defenders who are outnumbered will most likely have a strong influence on the outcome, should a defense of justification ever become necessary, and should the question of the attacker's ability become pivotal.

 

[Kleanbore]

That should do it for this one.