From the video that situation very well could have satisfied all of the requirements for the application of deadly force in self-defense, in Minnesota at least.

There are four basic requirements legally, and for me personally they match up pretty close to my moral requirements.

a) Reasonable Fear of Great Bodily Harm or Death (GBH can include physical disabilty and/or disfigurement (ie a large facia ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

From the video that situation very well could have satisfied all of the requirements for the application of deadly force in self-defense, in Minnesota at least.

There are four basic requirements legally, and for me personally they match up pretty close to my moral requirements.

a) Reasonable Fear of Great Bodily Harm or Death (GBH can include physical disabilty and/or disfigurement (ie a large facial scar has quailified in MN as GBH) being punched in the head which can easily result in unconsciencenous would also fall under fear of GBH/death.)

b) No method of retreat. The fact you are in a crowded area, with your back to a wall; you avenues of escape are limited. If your retreat would put you at risk, it is not a reasonable retreat (ie turning your back to run would put you at risk of being punched in the back of the head or having the 'bad guy' pull a concealed weapon.)

c) No lesser force will do. Being that their are multiple attackers, some of them armed, any less-than-lethal weapon would likely be useless even if you had one on you and was proficently skilled in the use of it.

d) You must be an 'unwilling participant.' In MN case law, your status as aan unwilling participant can be gained and lost based on your actions. If you call the bad guy a bad name and callenge him to duel in the parking lot, you ARE NOT an unwilling participant. If you then apologize to him and recant your challenge, you have now regained your status as unwilling participant.

My solution very well could have been the liberal application of 230gr 45 hollowpoints to center mass until the threat stopped.

Usually, I attempt to mitigate my associations with 'stupid people, stupid places, stupid activities.' However it appears that Blockheads is a decent resturant, in a decent area, at a decent tie of day/night.

Secondarily, conflict de-escalation may have solved that problem before it started.

Or their may have been an oppurtunity to leave before the problem progressed to physical violence.

Once violence begins I have a responsibility to myself and my family to end it as soon as possible.

Greg,

Were you serious in your post about deadly force?  If that situation is one where deadly force could truly be legally justified, I just went from being relatively indifferent to the conceal and carry law and perhaps a mild supporter of it to being an outright opponent of it.  There would be no need for a gun in that situation, and if it were escalated by someone pulling out a gun, it would be ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Greg,

Were you serious in your post about deadly force?  If that situation is one where deadly force could truly be legally justified, I just went from being relatively indifferent to the conceal and carry law and perhaps a mild supporter of it to being an outright opponent of it.  There would be no need for a gun in that situation, and if it were escalated by someone pulling out a gun, it would be the concealed handgun carrier's fault for the blood that day.  If it were in a dark alley at night and you were all alone and jumped by three people, then I could see more of an argument for at least drawing a gun in self-defense or in the defense of another.

It looked to me like it was a 4-on-1 situation, with one of the attackers armed with a very thick heavy length of chain another armed with what appears to be a steel patio chair (not an aluminum lawn chair). The other two are wearing baggy clothing and could very easily be concealing a knife, gun or other weapon.

expand this and all posts in this thread

It looked to me like it was a 4-on-1 situation, with one of the attackers armed with a very thick heavy length of chain another armed with what appears to be a steel patio chair (not an aluminum lawn chair). The other two are wearing baggy clothing and could very easily be concealing a knife, gun or other weapon.

A blow to the head with a chain, patio chair or even a fist can knock you out cold. Easily. Don't believe me, go watch Chuck Liddell v Rashad Evans @ UFC88. A dude who trains to get punched in the face goes all 'sack-of-potato' with one punch from a guy who in street clothes would look no more intimidating than Brandong.

Then what? The 4 dudes who are so inept at being members of a decent society are going to see you lying defenseless on the ground and decide you have had enough? Doubtful. Much more likely is that they are going to stomp on your head and kick you in the face. A person willing to create a physical engagement at a restaurant in the middle of the day is certainly not someone I would consider capable of acting in a reasonable and honorable manner.

Guess what, you are now eating out of a tube and shitting in a bag for the rest of your life. Tell your wife “It was just a lawn chair” when the bank repo’s the house. How righteous of you.

Have you ever faced two attackers, let alone four or more? Shit can go badly in a hurry, and there really is not much you can do once it starts. The only way you can be assured the best chance of coming out alive is to make sure it doesn’t come to physical contact.

Like I said, if it had been me in that situation I pray to God that it never would have come to something worthy of being on YouTube. But if it did I know how I would respond, and I am confident I would continue a life in which I can support the people I have a true responsibility towards. 99% of Defensive Gun Usages end not in gunshots, but in the sound of the bad guy running away.

Having been on the receiving end of a brutal gang beating, I'm gonna have to go ahead and agree with Greg here.  I was lucky that I didn't get seriously and permanently injured or even killed, and if you had a gun Shehan, a quick shot into the air would have probably diffused the situation pretty quickly.  The criminals all have concealed hand guns anyways, regardless of the laws on the books, so we might as well even t ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Having been on the receiving end of a brutal gang beating, I'm gonna have to go ahead and agree with Greg here.  I was lucky that I didn't get seriously and permanently injured or even killed, and if you had a gun Shehan, a quick shot into the air would have probably diffused the situation pretty quickly.  The criminals all have concealed hand guns anyways, regardless of the laws on the books, so we might as well even the playing field.

Shooting into the air? Now that is just reckless.

But you are correct, fights can permenatly damage your life, very quickly.

Just one swift kick to the testicle can inhibit your chance at reproducing.

One poke to the eye can leave you blind for life.

If one dude has a swiss army sized knife or bottle you can be cut and bleed to death before an ambo can arrive (even in ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Shooting into the air? Now that is just reckless.

But you are correct, fights can permenatly damage your life, very quickly.

Just one swift kick to the testicle can inhibit your chance at reproducing.

One poke to the eye can leave you blind for life.

If one dude has a swiss army sized knife or bottle you can be cut and bleed to death before an ambo can arrive (even in areas with sub-10 minute response times.)

This discussion boils down to two things.

1) Do you think that 4 guys weilding chains and chairs are likely to kill you?

and

2) Do you care?

 Mark - From what little I know about your beating, these seem to be very different circumstances.  Your beating was on the street, but it was at night, away from witnesses who could easily identify your attackers, and you were completely helpless.  The video takes place on a crowded street in broad daylight in front of a number of witnesses.  Only the most absolutely enraged or idiotic or drugged people would ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

 Mark - From what little I know about your beating, these seem to be very different circumstances.  Your beating was on the street, but it was at night, away from witnesses who could easily identify your attackers, and you were completely helpless.  The video takes place on a crowded street in broad daylight in front of a number of witnesses.  Only the most absolutely enraged or idiotic or drugged people would even consider trying to deal deadly harm in the video's situation.  Those that would do so would likely be quickly stopped or restrained by the spectators.  To make a long story short, I could see more of a case for the use of a gun in your case.  Your life could have seriously been at risk in a very real way.  That being said, I also could see Shehan firing that shot in the air and a.) one of your attackers taking out a gun himself and now the situation is escalated into absolute life and death or b.) the attackers fleeing and then coming back and trying to do worse damage than they would have otherwise to you and/or Shehan or c.) attacking Shehan and using the gun against him/you.  Most likely, yes, they would just flee and the situation would be diffused, but I'd rather have a hugely swollen nose and cuts and scrapes and a hospital visit than take the chance of losing a life.  I suppose that's easy for me to say not being on the receiving end of the beating.

Greg - To answer your two questions directly, in these circumstances 1.) No, at least the way they were using them and 2.) Yes.  I would be on your side if the video looked different, if it appeared these gusy were truly using deadly force, or if this were at night or not in a public place.  If it were just a matter of 'pull a gun and the situation is diffused' every time, then I'd be more inclined to say, "Why not err on the side of caution".  The problem is that pulling a gun automatically escalates the situation to life and death.  Yes a chain or a chair could kill you, but when a gun is pulled, it's very likely that someone could die.  When you pull a gun, who knows if they have a gun, who knows if an innocent bystander will get killed, and - really - as terrible as these guys behaved, I don't think they deserved to die for their actions that day.  Johnny put it well in his post.

My beating might have been at night but there were a shitload of spectators, and not one of them jumped in to help me until after the damage had been done.  Although I remember Adam being the one pulling me up so perhaps he had a hand in stopping it.  Needless to say, when I was on the ground I was getting full-power kicks to the head and face; it's a miracle I came out in as good of shape as I did (three broken teeth a ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

My beating might have been at night but there were a shitload of spectators, and not one of them jumped in to help me until after the damage had been done.  Although I remember Adam being the one pulling me up so perhaps he had a hand in stopping it.  Needless to say, when I was on the ground I was getting full-power kicks to the head and face; it's a miracle I came out in as good of shape as I did (three broken teeth and a fully broken nose). Had I been kicked in the eye, throat, or crotch with a steel toed boot you'd be talking to a very different Mark today, if at all.  

Sure, someone else might have had a gun, but that would mean that not only are these guys willing to gang-beat someone, they carry guns while they do it.  It only makes the case of carrying one yourself even stronger.  We don't have any laws about carrying knives or poisonous blow darts, yet we don't hear widespread reports of fights escalating to knife/poison slayings. Besides, gunshot wound isn't necessarily more dangerous than a stab wound, as Greg pointed out, and with a gun you can deliberately fire at the legs more easily and the wounds are cleaner, whereas with a knife the tendency would be to go for the chest, back, or throat with a tearing, stabbing motion. I'm not an expert on lethal weapons, though.

I believe we should have the right to make the decision about whether or not to conceal and carry on our own. It is at our own risk whether or not we use it in a justifiable manner, just as it is when we get behind the wheel of a car. It's no legal cakewalk if you end up killing someone even if it was clearly in self defense, but I'd take a courtroom battle and chance of prison time over the chance of being crippled for life or even killed, or worse - my family being harmed in the same manner.  The fact is, the people who are most likely to be responsible about gun ownership are the most restricted, and the people who are most likely to be reckless or even murderous don't follow the laws anyways.

I don't live in a neighborhood that justifies owning a handgun but you can bet your ass I'd buy one if I moved to a higher crime area. I also don't buy the arguments about the dangers of having a gun in the house. Pools are many times more dangerous to own than guns. That's just a side note though :)

I am going to just take this little segment and disect it.

"The video takes place on a crowded street in broad daylight in front of a number of witnesses.  Only the most absolutely enraged or idiotic or drugged people would even consider trying to deal deadly harm in the video's situation.  Those that would do so would likely be quickly stopped or restrained by the spectators."

&n ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

I am going to just take this little segment and disect it.

"The video takes place on a crowded street in broad daylight in front of a number of witnesses.  Only the most absolutely enraged or idiotic or drugged people would even consider trying to deal deadly harm in the video's situation.  Those that would do so would likely be quickly stopped or restrained by the spectators."

The 4 dudes who want to start a fight in broad daylight on a busy street in front of a number of witnesses are the ones who are 'absolutely enraged or idiotic or drugged.' If they are willing to go so far outside the binds of normal social mores and legal restrictions, what else do you think they will do? Personally, I don't trust them to not kill me. (Regardless of if they have a chain, chair, knife or gun. Fists kill people every day, falling and cracking your skull on a curb kills people, getting shoved in front of one of the cars in the street 2ft away kills people.)

And these witnesses, what do you think they will do? Spectators don't jump in and save the day. Specatators are worried about getting killed by the same enraged asshole that is beating your head into the pavement. Sure, they may call the cops... who will show up in 5-10 minutes. By that time it is likely you have already suffered a sever beating at the hands of a 'drugged up idiot' which will leave you scared for life at best, if you are lucky.

I don't give a shit about punishing the bad guys. I do give a shit about making sure I am able to continue living my life.

A few quick points:  As I said in my original post, I am more or less indifferent to the conceal and carry law, and, if anything, am probably a mild supporter of it.  My argument is not so much against the law itself, although if it truly allows deadly force in this video's situation then I am an opponent of it, but the idea that a gun could be pulled in this particular situation shown on the video.  In general, I ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

A few quick points:  As I said in my original post, I am more or less indifferent to the conceal and carry law, and, if anything, am probably a mild supporter of it.  My argument is not so much against the law itself, although if it truly allows deadly force in this video's situation then I am an opponent of it, but the idea that a gun could be pulled in this particular situation shown on the video.  In general, I would have no problem with Mark carrying a concealed weapon if he were in a more violent neighborhood. 

I probably should not have commented as thoroughly on your beating, Mark, since I wasn't there and only had vague memories of the situation.  If you were literally laying on the ground helpless and a number of guys continued to kick you with full force without any sign of stopping, then I would be more inclined to say a gun might be useful.  Again, though, I see these two situations as very different.

At no time did I truly think or worry that the individual in the video was in life-threatening danger, except insofar as the situation might escalate into something worse.  He had places to run, if he had to do so.  None of the attacks, unless perfectly placed, would cause serious/irreversible/mortal injury.  I may have over-stated witnesses' general ability to overcome their fear in my first post, since we all know the stories where they haven't intervened, but the fact that this is in broad daylight with so many people around would usually serve as a natural deterrent.  If nothing else, the threat is there that they may intervene, that they will identify you, etc.  I know the fighters aren't thinking all of this through logically at the time, but it's intuitive.  It's the same reason why I would be more naturally frightened if four guys jumped in an alley at night than if four guys jumped me on Grand Avenue at noon.  Also, I would like to think that if someone saw true deadly harm being done, they would intervene.  It's easy for me to say this sitting at my computer, but I would like to think that if I saw someone being kicked on the ground in this situation or beaten helplessly with a chain, even weak old me would intervene and at least try to tackle the guy.  Mark's situation again strikes me as different since there wasn't the power of numbers and it was less public.  If they had a gun pointed at someone and I had nothing, then I probably would be less courageous.  I suppose you never know unless you're in the situation, but if weak old me would intervene, I find it hard to believe that former hockey player John Doe and off-duty cop Jane and former con-man Billy the Kid wouldn't stand up in most cases.

At any rate, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.  I was just taken aback that the situation in the video is one where someone could truly see the use of deadly force being justifiable.  I realize hindsight is 20/20 and things could have happened differently, but the fact that everyone is now okay, that this video is posted on YouTube and people look at it and say 'Wow, that's pretty crazy' and then go back to their work without much thought, that the people involved in the altercation are probably back to living their normal lives speaks louder than anything else.  The mothers still have their wayward son(s) and can still hope that they'll turn things around one day.  All the spectators are alive and well and only lost their lunch in exchange for a good story.  The other man involved in the fight maybe got some stitches and is alive and well, telling his friends about how he stood up to four guys.  Who knows what would have happened if that gun were pulled. 

It should also be pointed out that the chain was never used and the guy who appeared to be the one trying to defuse the situation grabs it at one point to prevent the guy from using it.  I'm not sure this situation would have warranted a gun, but then again, I'm not the one who had a steel chair swung at my face.

Also, John, you say that it's unlikely those blows would have been serious, but that's a pre ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

It should also be pointed out that the chain was never used and the guy who appeared to be the one trying to defuse the situation grabs it at one point to prevent the guy from using it.  I'm not sure this situation would have warranted a gun, but then again, I'm not the one who had a steel chair swung at my face.

Also, John, you say that it's unlikely those blows would have been serious, but that's a pretty hard thing to predict. Even an unskilled fighter can get a lucky shot in and take out somebodies eye or collapse their larynx. 

I am going to have to agree with Greg on this one. People and situations are unpredictable. Those 4 guys were looking for a fight. They wanted to start a brawl. Although, most people would have diffused the situation right away by giving in and moving on. Some people have large egos that they can't control and need to smash faces to show how tough and prideful they are. Once someone takes the first punch its survival mode. You ca ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

I am going to have to agree with Greg on this one. People and situations are unpredictable. Those 4 guys were looking for a fight. They wanted to start a brawl. Although, most people would have diffused the situation right away by giving in and moving on. Some people have large egos that they can't control and need to smash faces to show how tough and prideful they are. Once someone takes the first punch its survival mode. You can't trust or rely on the other person, let alone 4 to go easy on you. 

I think concealed hand guns would have no doubt turned the situation we saw there from a ruckus to the saddest day of many a persons lives.  God forbid in the melee the guy with the handgun misses, struggles in close quarters, hits a kid on the street, whatever.  I'm not sure whether or not I agree with conceal and carry laws...all I can say is if Greg was involved in that particular situation and was strapped, it would ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

I think concealed hand guns would have no doubt turned the situation we saw there from a ruckus to the saddest day of many a persons lives.  God forbid in the melee the guy with the handgun misses, struggles in close quarters, hits a kid on the street, whatever.  I'm not sure whether or not I agree with conceal and carry laws...all I can say is if Greg was involved in that particular situation and was strapped, it would have been a tragic day.

all I can say is if Greg was involved in that particular situation and was strapped, it would have been a tragic day.

Would that be more or less tragic than a victim catching a chain to the orbital bone which fractures and leads to retinal detachment leaving him blind for life, losing his job and eventually his home?

The problem here is n ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

all I can say is if Greg was involved in that particular situation and was strapped, it would have been a tragic day.

Would that be more or less tragic than a victim catching a chain to the orbital bone which fractures and leads to retinal detachment leaving him blind for life, losing his job and eventually his home?

The problem here is not the person attempting to defend himself. The problem here is the thugs attempting to assault a person in broad daylight in a good neighboarhood at a classy resturant.

That is the fucking problem.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda, but didn't.  Those punks didn't do anything that amounted to more than a few thrown chairs and ruined lunches.  Mark's comment about shooting a gun in the air to disperse the situation illustrates the problem.  That IS a reckless thing to do, and not at all a bright idea.  If you pull a gun, you better be ready to use it, and if your not ready to use it with deadly force, you shouldn't ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Shoulda, woulda, coulda, but didn't.  Those punks didn't do anything that amounted to more than a few thrown chairs and ruined lunches.  Mark's comment about shooting a gun in the air to disperse the situation illustrates the problem.  That IS a reckless thing to do, and not at all a bright idea.  If you pull a gun, you better be ready to use it, and if your not ready to use it with deadly force, you shouldn't draw it at all.  On one hand, I do think an individual should have the right to protect themselves, given the fact that those kids could have killed someone etc.

But any yahoo with a gun would have turned that situation from relatively harmless into a blood bath.  a trained officer already has the right to carry a concealed weapon, and that DOES make me feel safer.  But they are trained to use it, they understand things like stopping power, ricochets, etc.  If we live in a society where people can carry concealed weapons, I think they need more than a simple license.  I think they should undergo extensive firearm training etc.  They need to be ready to use that weapon responsibly.  I don't think, if you underwent that training Greg, you would be well advised to draw and fire your weapon in the situation on video.  So many civilians, ruckus, etc.

Johnny hit it on the head in my mind.  If I would elaborate on one point, so many of the defenses of using lethal force in this situation require so many "shoulda woulda coulda"'s as Johnny put it.  Yes, hypothetically, the chain might have been used and landed a perfect blow to someone's eye and blinding them for life.  Hypothetically, the lawn chair might nail someone right in the soft spot of the skull and cause ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Johnny hit it on the head in my mind.  If I would elaborate on one point, so many of the defenses of using lethal force in this situation require so many "shoulda woulda coulda"'s as Johnny put it.  Yes, hypothetically, the chain might have been used and landed a perfect blow to someone's eye and blinding them for life.  Hypothetically, the lawn chair might nail someone right in the soft spot of the skull and cause permanent brain damage.  Hypothetically, a lot of things could go wrong. 

A few points. 1.) In some of those cases, a person could *then* draw a gun more justifiably.  e.g. If the video showed two of the guys wailing on someone's face with a chain, then all right.  If they started to do so, then I would understand.  They didn't. 2.)  That's a terribly slippery slope.  I forgot who pointed it out earlier, but, heck, a fist could cause permanent and terrible damage if the punch is placed right.  Who knows if Drunk Dan is going to knock someone out with his fist and then proceed to gauge out his eyes when he's on the ground?  Does that mean that every bar fight that erupts justifies a gun being pulled?  How about if someone starts throwing rocks at you?  That rock might hit you in the eye and hit your pupil just right and blind you for life.  A kick to the right spot, as was mentioned before, could cause someone to be impotent for life.  Every time you see someone kicking someone else, then, you are justified in using deadly force?  3.)  This may not apply to Greg, but I wonder if others of you would apply the same logic to larger fights such as wars.  e.g. The next time that you hear a story about Israel sending rockets at a group of Palestinians or mowing them down with bullets because they were throwing rocks at their troops, will you support the Israelis, because, after all, the rocks might be deadly force.  Or, if American forces in Afghanistan or Iraq were to open fire at a growing mob in the streets because "you never know if that mob might turn violent and start opening fire", will you support the American forces? 

ok, John, what if the assailants are approaching your wife with a chain or his fists?  Or your child? You're not going to think "well, the chances are they won't kill or permanently maim her with the first blow." You're going to pull out the gun and fire it at the bastard before he gets a chance.

And Johnny, I agree that people who carry guns should have as much training as a cop does. We require people ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

ok, John, what if the assailants are approaching your wife with a chain or his fists?  Or your child? You're not going to think "well, the chances are they won't kill or permanently maim her with the first blow." You're going to pull out the gun and fire it at the bastard before he gets a chance.

And Johnny, I agree that people who carry guns should have as much training as a cop does. We require people to take a test to get a drivers license, the same system could apply to guns (and perhaps does, I'm not familiar with the process).

Mark:  Again, I am commenting strictly on the video that was originally posted.  Yes, if someone were menacingly approaching my wife and children with a chain in his hand and looking like he was winding up to use it, I draw my hypothetical concealed gun.  In the video, there was a very different situation.  The one with the chain was on the restaurant's side and more of a defender and whenever he appeared ...

expand this and all posts in this thread

Mark:  Again, I am commenting strictly on the video that was originally posted.  Yes, if someone were menacingly approaching my wife and children with a chain in his hand and looking like he was winding up to use it, I draw my hypothetical concealed gun.  In the video, there was a very different situation.  The one with the chain was on the restaurant's side and more of a defender and whenever he appeared to be ready to use it, he restrained himself or was restrained by the presumed manager.  Even so, a chain being used by a defender is a little different than a chain used by an attacker, since the defender presumably would use it to fend the assailants off and not beat them to a senseless pulp and try to kill them.  If a guy approached my wife and child with his fists, I would try to diffuse the situation, stand in his way, and try to talk to the guy first.  If that fails, I would tackle him and opt for the more old-fashioned routine.  The only reason I might be slightly more inclined to draw a gun in that situation is because there is a random stranger approaching a woman and a child violently.  We're obviously not dealing with a normal, sane human being at that point and violent force may be more necessary.  All that being said, my main point is that you present a very different situation than the one in the video.