TexasCHLforum.com

There are really only two clear cases I visualize where an intervening third party is probably beyond reproach. Probably. One, if a child is being sexually assaulted and two, when one party has given up the fight and is obviously being battered to death. Mass shootings, sort of a new phenomena, would be another to tack on the list, I suppose. What are you gonna do, sit there and wait your turn to die? Otherwise, call the cops and get the plate number. You get the BG's number, the cops have usually get them in due time if the plates aren't bogus.

AndyC wrote:

MoJo wrote:OK here we go - - - You put on your good guy hat grab your good guy gun and mount your white charger and rush into something you know nothing about

All of that is true - but note I'm not talking about shooting anyone; just following discreetly and keeping the police updated (the firearm is purely for defensive purposes only).

We had a few cases in South Africa where witnesses got the plates - but they were faked, or the cops didn't find the car in time :(

Andy, I wasn't referring to what you proposed I might well do the same thing. Trying to sort out what is going on in a disturbance is difficult and dangerous enough for trained police officers. A non LEO trying to intervene is just - - - well for lack of a better word - - - stupid.

As often happens, I think Andy C has the best response. Sort of a compromise between the disparate impulses to charge in as white knight and to stay inside and call 911. Andy's response is well reasoned, rational, not too "gung ho" or "gun stupid". And it will likely HELP more than merely a 911 call without subjecting the pursuing party to excessive danger of confrontation.

And his tagline about Kitty Genovese is a potent reminder of what can happen if we do nothing, or even if we don't do enough.

Here's my 2cents:
While it "creates a vacuum", the truth is if one of us jumps in and uses a firearm to try to stop a potential crime and it turns out to be one of the above "permissible" cases (the partys involved are "lovers", it's happened before, it's a father removing his daughter from a bad situation, etc) we risk losing our ability to protect our own loved ones. Ie: becoming a covicted felon and not be able to possess a firearm.
I've read it's a good idea to think out what you would do when faced with various situations - I've thought about this one myself.
In this example, I personally would be willing to use my vehicle to disable the "badguy's" if I thought it would give the police a chance to catch him.
Yes, I realize that in the laws eyes even that would be a criminal act, but it's a far cry from "using a firearm in the commision of a violent crime".
I (knock on wood) hope/pray that if my wife or one of my children were being abducted someone would at least try to stop it - not just call PD and hope for the best.
Disclaimer: Many, many years ago a neighbor of mine was raped. Three men had followed her home from a store and waited until she had her key in her front foor lock before they rushed her, forced her inside her apartment, and then all three took turns raping her.
I was asleep in my apartment just a few doors down. I woke up to her horrific screams - this was after the rapists had left and she had made her way into the courtyard and began screaming. She was naked and her neck, wrists, and ankles, were bright red from where they had chocked her and held her down.
She was obviously in shock, standing there trembleing and screaming. I asked what happened (several other people came outside when they heard the screaming, and most had their cordless (this was way back before everone had a cell) phones to their ear with 911 on the line. She told us what had happened and as I turned to run inside and get her a blanket I remember her screaming, "Oh my God there's (explective) in my hair!!!"
This incident really made an impact on me (obviously it should have). I remember thinking how sinisterly "smart" it was for the rapists to wait until she had her key in the lock before they rushed her.
Of course I had to consider the "what ifs" back then. Like, what would I have done if I had been leaving my apartment when they were initially rushing her? I would have at least yelled and screamed at them and I imagine things would not have progressed as bad as they did.
Sadley this was not my first or last close encounter with a violent crime. We've had a few "what if" posts on this forum over the last few weeks here on the forum that were met with a mix of responses ranging from constructive critisism to downright meaness - accusations of "overreacting" were flying when IMHO they were unwarranted.
Sorry for the rant but perhaps now one can understand why some folks choose to be a little more cautious than others.
I pray that none of you or your familys will ever be the victim of or witness to a violent crime - and I pray that you'll do everything in your power to make sure of it.

Haha - funny you ask. I responded to a dang near similiar call last night. Guy calls from a club and says a male forced her into the backseat of a car while she was screaming. Two other people in the car.

We swoop in, follow the car into the neighboring city and knock it down. One of my partners knocks it down...and guess what...it's nothing. They're married, she was drunk wasn't ready to leave the club (2:15am).

I would say be a good witness. Vehicle info, esp plate and color will be clutch. Suspect info, direction of travel. This is definitely no situation for a CHL holder to get involved in without assurance of danger to LIFE. Things are frequently not as they seem.

MoJo wrote:you miss and kill a 3 year old playing across the street.

...your gun goes off while sitting in the safe, hits the brakeman of a passing train, causing the train to go out of control and crash into a military convoy carrying nuclear weapons, which detonate and wipe out all life within a mile radius...

Yeah, let's grease that slope some more.

CrimsonSoul wrote:Now what would you do in this situation?

File a noise complaint. If she doesn't want him charged with domestic assault, then there was no excuse for her screaming, and she needs to be treated as any other noise violator.

Also, 42.01(a)(6), fighting with another in a public place; might be stretching 42.06 a bit too much to claim she was initiating a report by her actions, but could be worth a try.

mctowalot wrote:While it "creates a vacuum", the truth is if one of us jumps in and uses a firearm to try to stop a potential crime and it turns out to be one of the above "permissible" cases (the partys involved are "lovers", it's happened before, it's a father removing his daughter from a bad situation, etc) we risk losing our ability to protect our own loved ones. Ie: becoming a covicted felon and not be able to possess a firearm.

If the victim is clearly over 18, and there's no outward indication that she is mentally incapable of caring for herself, then neither of your examples is "permissible." Both are assault and kidnapping. Note that the exception for kidnapping requires that the assailant be acting with intent to assume lawful control of the victim, which, outside of a proper and justified citizen's arrest, you just can't do to an adult who isn't mentally disabled.

This is why everything in PC 9 specifically hinges on what you "reasonably believe."

Y2bad4u wrote:You have the right to protect a third person and keep in mind that if you just stay a witness, how would you feel if she was killed as he was kidnapping her or after he got her in the car and left? What you you lost sight of the car while waiting for the LEO to arrive? What if after that, you find out he killed her and dumped her? She could possibly be alive if you had intervened. I think the situation resolved in the best case possible, but I fear people get the mind frame to just watch, be a witness, and wait for LEO. EVERY SITUATION IS DIFFERENT, and must be analyzed every time, but please don't assume we should always be a witness.

It's worthwhile to note the differences in viewpoint between the folks who have actual experience with lots of real life violent situations and many of those who do not emerge in stark contrast with each other. I see it as another illustration of the axiom that good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment.

Those who haven't had much situational opportunity to exercise bad judgment often have trouble understanding the counsel of those who survived those exercises and now hold the experience. They see the folks who favor a cautious approach as either apathetic, lacking empathy for their fellow man, or lacking in courage.

I would encourage folks who see things this way ask themselves if these are reasonable judgments to apply to people who have chosen professions where they routinely put themselves in harm's way, including repeated exposure to deadly danger, for strangers day after day for decades.

Those who have responded to and investigated incidents like the original one described here know that they very frequently turn out to be something much different than what the initial reports described. Almost all of these people have already made the early career mistake of rushing in with the white knight mindset only to have both the supposed bad guy and the intoxicated damsel in distress charge them and try to rip them to shreds.

After fighting them off with OC, tasers, and a little groundfighting, and having them refuse to press charges on one another, the LEO "white knight" is left filing only charges stemming from the battery on himself. He'll probably also receive a comment or two and a knowing look that speaks volumes from his older and wiser colleagues. Fortunately the legal immunities attached to LEO status relieves him of most worries about civil suits from either or both other parties in the encounter, and he goes on duty after that with a firm resolution not to make the same mistake twice when so many new ones are still available.

On the other hand, it's not at all unusual for civilians who rush into these nasty situations to find themselves in an all out melee with the other parties when officers arrive. In those case the would be white knight finds himself eating gravel and handcuffed along with the others until things get sorted out. "Sorted out" may well be that he leaves the scene in the back of a patrol car based on the battery complaints from the other parties, who don't press any charges against each other and assert that this maniac attacked them from nowhere.

Without the legal immunities of an LEO the would be rescuer will then have his 15 minutes of fame in the local press and the joys of explaining to his employer why someone arrested for a violent crime should be kept on the payroll. Then he'll get to exercise his persuasive powers explaining why the time he'll need away from work for court appearances and meetings with his attorney won't impact his job performance. He'll also get to help the economy by contributing significant portions of his assets to the accounts receivable ledger of one or more attorneys who will try to get the court to apply the "reasonable man" interpretation as a defense for the would be hero's actions under TPC Section 9.

It's been said that those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. It should be remembered that there are costs associated with learning only from one's own experience instead of deriving benefit from the experiences of others.

KD5NRH wrote:

MoJo wrote:you miss and kill a 3 year old playing across the street.

...your gun goes off while sitting in the safe, hits the brakeman of a passing train, causing the train to go out of control and crash into a military convoy carrying nuclear weapons, which detonate and wipe out all life within a mile radius...

Yeah, let's grease that slope some more.

"sitting in the safe" lol!
(smileys not working on my "smart" phone this morning)
this scenario would lead of course to the banning of both chl and nuclear weapons - it's a win win for the world! Don't forget that the blast reaches the zoo also and kills off the last two remaining albino newfizzle alligators, and it's all your fault!

FWIW - when Bobby Hill takes the womens self defense class in Arlen, part of the instruction is that he yell, "I DON'T KNOW YOU!!!"
So while were speculating throw that in too.
What if the lady is screaming that she doesn't know the kidnappper? She could be lying!

kidnapping requires that the assailant be acting with intent to assume lawful control of the victim

Would not kidnapping constitute unlawful control?

casingpoint wrote:

kidnapping requires that the assailant be acting with intent to assume lawful control of the victim

Would not kidnapping constitute unlawful control?

Hence the rest of the original statement: "the exception for kidnapping requires that the assailant be acting with intent to assume lawful control of the victim,"

I should have said "exception to" but you get the idea.