Was this self-defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anaries said:
One guy stole his money, the next guy tried to come across the counter and it did look like he may have taken a swing. Regardless, it is trespassing into a private area and looked very threatening. The guy would have been surrounded. Nevada ‘stand your ground’/ Castle doctrine would seem to imply, to me, that the guy who got stabbed deserved it and the clerk is a hero.
Click to expand...
He took a swing after being stabbed. There's no way you can say he attacked the guy before getting stabbed. Regardless of your view of the outcome, we should be able to recognize clear facts of the case.
 
Either he did or didn’t swing, but he shouldn’t have jumped the counter. I would have felt surrounded and threatened, in likely what could be considered to be a ‘castle’.

Now if you want to argue morally, that is different and subjective compared to legally. Morally to each his own 👍
 
David Mary said:
There was no imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm. The one who jumped the counter clearly didn't even head for the clerk at first. Besides, both of those guys looked like they could have been effortlessly flicked away like the little snots they are, and were, respectively. Fight back in defense of property, yes. With lethal force, in the case above? You have to be outta your mind.
Click to expand...
See, to me, I've never been in a fistfight. Not as a boy, not at all. Did not play contact sports - I wore sweatpants over my jeans and boots in Phys Ed so I wouldn't have to change out of my preferred attire. There are tiny people who have been scrapping all their lives and are quite capable, and, while it appeared he knew these two... I would absolutely not feel "confident" to "flick away" or physically deal with, without issue, most people in general. Most teens I see walking home from the high school, come to think of it, are larger than me, at 5'4. Not without boots, or spray, or some force enhancer, and not even then, as I do not believe I have pain tolerance yet, or enough exposure to it - this is what I hope martial arts sparring will give to me. The idea of a real fight is a scary thing to me - where I don't pick up on what's happening and move, run, jump, hit first, whatever... and I actually get a few boots in my ribs or fists in my face - I'm worried I would not be able to react. I'd assume a lot of people these days are like that, unfortunately.

Once, when I was about 15-16 years old, a female friend who had a bit of an older-sister relationship to me (who was also a "street punk" who travelled nationwide until she cleaned up her act a few years ago, became an addiction counselor - very tough girl, carried a lock-sock for the men that would creep on her while street-sleeping in big cities), gave me a very gentle "butt-whoopin'" after I smarted off one too many times after drinking alcohol, something I did do as a teen. She had such comparitive experience as a fighter, she was able to "hit/punch" me off of a bench, lower me to the grass, and proceed to "pummel" me a bit. She didn't leave more than a bruise on my arm, but to me it felt like a real attack. This, in her world, was a friend teaching another friend a lesson when they got out of line. Morality aside.... I do not have the training yet, to be able to "effortlessly flick away" a woman who weighs less than me. (Not that I tried, I just covered my head when the light pummel came, I am sure had I tried, I'd have been unsuccessful.

It is incredibly sad. I hated to see him get hit in the neck like that. I understand an untrained person in a fury of adrenaline was just in a flurry, but ierno... what do I want, for everybody with a boxcutter to get MBC lessons? Sad situation, indeed. A lot of musing here, I know, my apologies.
 
What I would hope for is people who have the restraint to know when they are being attacked and when they are not. The alleged self-defender is the one who escalated the encounter into a use of lethal force scenario.
 
I wonder if the plan was to get the clerk to chase the first guy outside so the other could fill his backpack.
 
Hashishiin said:
I would absolutely not feel "confident" to "flick away" or physically deal with, without issue, most people in general.
Click to expand...

Silly choice of words, but I wanted to call them snots for what they did. Guess what? I was a snot when I was a teenager. I did my share of stupid things. I'm glad I was given time to rethink many things. Effortlessly was perhaps hyperbolic, centered on the very evident lack of confidence or presence from these two punks. I almost felt like the clerk only needed to make some noise to scare them away.

Hashishiin said:
It is incredibly sad. I hated to see him get hit in the neck like that.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Hashishiin said:
I understand an untrained person in a fury of adrenaline was just in a flurry, but ierno... what do I want, for everybody with a boxcutter to get MBC lessons?
Click to expand...

I think more people should familiarize themselves with the concepts taught by Marc MacYoung on nononsenseslefdefense.com. And not subscribe to the false dichotomy of "either you think this guy was 100% justified of jumping straight to lethal force without any doubt just by seeing the video, or you don't even believe in self defense or defense of property".
 
Everyone should try not to escalate and look for peaceful solutions. However, there is a time and a place to stand tough. This 22y/o kid had no training except for video games and is alive. F the creeps who broke in, F them for putting the clerk in that position.
 
Last edited:
Why would anyone be expected to make perfect decisions/actions in a situation where tenths or even hundreths of a second mean the difference between life and death. To expect that, especially looking from the outside in after the fact and from a remote location; is absolutely unreasonable, inhumane, unhuman and frankly defies nature. Choose wrong or hesitate too long and end up in the ground, that is the position these thugs put this man in against his will.

Any jury and judge should be put through the same, before they decide to play God with another man's life. You have 0.5 seconds make the life or death choice..choose wrong and either you die or get victimized for a second time by the system. It's truly disturbing.

Bottom line: Don't threaten people if you can't handle the potential consequences.
 
Anaries said:
Everyone should try not escalate and look for peaceful solutions. However, there is a time and a place to stand tough. This 22y/o kid had no training except for video games and is alive. F the creeps who broke in, F them for putting the clerk in that position.
Click to expand...
Agree
AlongTheRazorsEdge said:
Bottom line: Don't threaten people if you can't handle the potential consequences.
Click to expand...
David Mary David Mary
Marc MacYoung continues to provide insight the more I read, really good stuff.
 
Close call, but no. He wasn't physically threatened. The guy who hopped the counter wasn't brandishing a weapon. The shop owner went straight to stab city when he could have shown the guy the knife and told him to eff off, which he told a reporter he had done successfully in the past. The castle doctrine doesn't apply to commercial establishments.
 
In the heat of the adrenaline rush, people expect that everyone should able to make smart and tactile choices, and quickly?

I dunno. I've been in plenty of scraps, mugged once, was ganged up on twice (once by gun point), and robbed once. Not counting the multiple times things thankfully de-escalated enough for me to run away. Even had an instance where after a fight that I won, the dude drove off to get a baseball bat and return.

Each one of those interactions, there was no way police would have made it in time to rescue me, and I was operating at instinct level to survive.

Criminals are given waaaay to much benefit of the doubt.

This shop keeper did not start the fight. He ended it. We were not there. He reacted and did what he did.
 
MolokaiRider said:
In the heat of the adrenaline rush, people expect that everyone should able to make smart and tactile choices, and quickly?
Click to expand...

No, but enough to distinguish between an attack and not an attack. Jumping over a counter aiming at the shelf is not starting a fight. Knife man finished the fight he started. This is not "giving the criminal benefit of doubt". I acknowledge he is a criminal, a thief in particular. He was not an assailant. That was the clerk. Justifying his lethal force against an otherwise nonviolent thief is pretty much saying the law is wrong, and siding with "vigilante justice" instead.
 
Try to rob someone, you get what you get. It’s an inherently risky proposition. I’d give the owner a pass, personally. This brazen crap has to stop.
 
Right but knocking his teeth out with a good thrust from a baseball bat, for example, would have knocked the brazen right out of him too.
 
David Mary said:
No, but enough to distinguish between an attack and not an attack. Jumping over a counter aiming at the shelf is not starting a fight. Knife man finished the fight he started. This is not "giving the criminal benefit of doubt". I acknowledge he is a criminal, a thief in particular. He was not an assailant. That was the clerk. Justifying his lethal force against an otherwise nonviolent thief is pretty much saying the law is wrong, and siding with "vigilante justice" instead.
Click to expand...
I hear you.

And neither one of us knows the whole story, or what that interaction was at ground level. So I can completely understand there are factors I am going to miss.

However, your definition of starting the fight is different than mine. If my space is invaded by an aggressor at any level of aggression while being burglarized, I am left with the discretion of protecting my life and property, along with having to decide what level of response is warranted...in seconds.

My life is worth more than the instigator, and it is going to be difficult in that split second to apply an appropriate response. Trying to follow the law is all fine and dandy, but life events are messy and non-linear.
 
David Mary said:
He used lethal force without having any force directed against him first.
Click to expand...
3 ski masked robbers , one apparently armed, walk into a vape shop ...should be joke , but it wasn't funny for one of them .

What don't you understand about this being a potentially lethal threat ? The threat of force IS force !

Did you try to watch the video and pretend it was your home being trespassed upon and you were alone; instead of a vape shop manned by the owner ?

They weren't there to bring the "good news" my friend .
 
DocJD said:
What don't you understand about this being a potentially lethal threat ?
Click to expand...

As you said, potential. Not imminent. They might attack. They might not. And...

They. Didn't. Attack him.

He. Attacked. Them (the one guy).

You are saying because they "might" attack him, that he has the right to instantly preemptively use lethal force. And you don't see how that would create an untenable societal precedent.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top