Getting back/even

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,996
Location
United States of America
I was just pondering scenarios in my mind and what if an assailant shot you en started to walk away? So, what do you do? Concentrate on getting rehabilitated or try to stop him to hold him liable? Im guessing shooting him in the back is a no-no.




In other words, are we only allowed to use force to prevent an attack OR is it fair game to retaliate?


Thank you
 
If someone shot me I feel justified in shooting back. I'd probably shoot him in the back if thats the target presented to me. not sure I'd do much pondering.
 
I would shoot back. He's already shot you once, you don't know if he's walking away or going to his car to get more ammo (or walking away because the gun jammed/reloading), all you do know is he's used deadly force against you and you shot back. You feared for your life and you used your firearm to protect you.

Let the police/court determine if your actions where justifiable.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
I was just pondering scenarios in my mind and what if an assailant shot you en started to walk away? So, what do you do? Concentrate on getting rehabilitated or try to stop him to hold him liable? Im guessing shooting him in the back is a no-no.




In other words, are we only allowed to use force to prevent an attack OR is it fair game to retaliate?


Thank you


Having fallen on my face, my searching hand feels blood pouring profusely from a 1.5 inch exit wound in my lower abdomen. Adrenaline is surging and I decide to get even. Pushing myself with my left hand off the ground, I reach with my slippery from blood right hand for the concealed-carry inside pocket in my aromatic fine English leather jacket and pull out my Mark XIX .50 caliber Desert Eagle. Trailing blood I sprint after the perp who just tried to snuff me. Even though I have lost at least three pints of blood, and the hand cannon is weighing me down considerably, I catch up with the lowlife who is just about to jump into a curbside parked Honda Accord. I shoot the lowlife's kneecaps off. His legs get cleanly blown off. He sinks onto his bloody stumps and I push the dazed and gushing blood everywhere creep into the driver's seat of his poor assassin's car. I start the engine and jam one of the perp's legs between the gas pedal and the dashboard. The Accord with the now screaming lowlife speeds off and plunges off the convenient railroad overpass, crashes in front of an approaching AMTRAK train, which derails following an unrealistically large explosion. I pick up the one left behind leg and wisecrack, You forgot this" while I chuck the appendage into the burning inferno below. Satisfied, I wipe my bloody hands on my pants, put the Desert Eagle back in my concealed carry pocket. I stick my thumb in the exit wound and head for the next Walgreens for some alcohol wipes and a few BandAids. And this was just a typical Tuesday evening!

In other, more concise words, I like to get even.




hotwheels
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
It is both immoral and illegal to retaliate. You may use necessary and proportional force to stop an attack, not to exact revenge.

And dead men do tell tales....

http://www.amazon.com/Dead-Men-Tell-Tales-Anthropologist/dp/0385479689


Immoral? Maybe,maybe not. Unethical, in our times and place, sure. Morals pertain to the personal moral compass, while ethics pertain to commonly accepted principles in a societal system. Morals and ethics may match, but often they don't.

But never mind, probably immoral is an alternative spelling of ethics in some dictionary.

hotwheels
 
Originally Posted By: MrQuackers
Evil does not stop until it is stopped.


Of course, in order to stop evil, you will have to become a little evil yourself. As Nitzsche said, "He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." That was the point I was trying to make with my fictional contribution to this thread.

hotwheels
 
Do or say something to make him turn around facing you, then shoot. You don't ever want holes going from back to front, but rather front to back.

Better yet, don't get hit first.
 
Originally Posted By: Astro14
It is both immoral and illegal to retaliate. You may use necessary and proportional force to stop an attack, not to exact revenge.

And dead men do tell tales....

http://www.amazon.com/Dead-Men-Tell-Tales-Anthropologist/dp/0385479689


I agree , a no shoot scenario. Unless he is selecting another target and is still firing in any manner, then i would shoot even if he is not facing me.

Generally, a mentality of getting back, or getting even leads to your own demise, even if slowly.

My rule of combat would be to survive. You are wounded, he is not, reengaging him is not smart, live to fight another day , in court.
 
Last edited:
If I am shot, or shot at, and can get my gun out, your bet your
[censored] I'll shoot the SOB if I can. Back or anywhere else! Simple as that!
 
Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
shooting him in the back is illegal but i could not resist and dead men tell no tales.


No, but autopsies do. Never shoot someone running away. Ever. Ask yourself if that moment of passion is worth potentially spending the rest of your life in prison.
 
What if that person walking away was Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold or Adam Lanza? What if this person shot you in a school, theater or supermarket? Gentlemen, every case is different and you cannot know the mindset of a criminal intent on harming others.
 
Hey hotwheels, let me know when the book comes out. Sounds like it will be a good one
 
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
I was just pondering scenarios in my mind and what if an assailant shot you en started to walk away? So, what do you do? Concentrate on getting rehabilitated or try to stop him to hold him liable? Im guessing shooting him in the back is a no-no.




In other words, are we only allowed to use force to prevent an attack OR is it fair game to retaliate?


Thank you


People have a right to self defense (emphasis added).

Where does this hypothetical take place? It could make a difference.

In the hypothetical, what if the wounded person is a police officer? Does it make a difference? Why or why not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom