My buddy had to pony up good chuck of cash in a self defense case where the perpetrator was running away but still shooting with his back turned as he was shooting. Thank God for surveillance cameras
I remember the kyle rittenhouse trial, the prosecutor made a huge deal about the first guy getting shot in the back. Then when the details came out, we learned kyle and the guy were face to face, the guy was lunging towards him, and he was shot through the top of his shoulderblade and through his torso. Prosecutors are the scum of the earth and they will do everything they can to make a shot to the back the highlight of their case.
Let’s not forget the sage legal advice from Ron White, “You can start shootin em in the leg until they turn around… cuz eventually, they’re gonna get curious.”
Ask Garak from Deep Space Nine. Garak : When the Klingons attacked the station, Gul Dukat and I were fighting side by side. At one point, he turned his back to me, and I must admit that for a moment, he made a very tempting target. Odo : You'd shoot a man in the back? Garak : Well, it's the safest way, isn't it?
Massad Ayoob mentions in his lethal force book that in .25 of a second, a person can turn lateral to you. In .5 of a second, they can have their back turned to you. So if you're attacked and you start pumping out .25 splits, and let's say it takes you .5 of a second to realize the attacker is turning around to retreat, you could get at least 2 rounds in his side and/or back.
In the gunfight I was in the guy who was trying to kill me ran a few yards then turned back around, started shooting again, and shot my friend in the mouth. I think once someone is trying their best to kill you they are still a deadly threat until they are out of range. I had already hit him multiple times center mass but that doesn’t mean that the can’t still kill you while they are dying.
If in a gunfight, you don't wait for the perp to turn back and face you.. or you'll die. And perps can run and still fire backwards. Helps to have cameras though.
The gun is the last tool in your posession to be used. It is used why you are in fear of life and not using it will cause more harm to you and others than using it to end a life. Never ask if, or may I use it. Only use it if you must use it!!
Im glad you guys cleared the air regarding this particular one, because for *YEARS* I heard that very thing John said in the beginning "You can't shoot someone in the back or you'll 100% go to prison!"
The idea of giving a criminal a fair fight is bizarre to me. One would be literally making it easier for a criminal to complete an act of wrong-doing, then calling it "honorable." That would be like Dwight Eisenhower giving the Nazis a heads-up before D-day to make sure the fight was fair! 😵💫
The Rules of Engagement in war are different than in self-defense. Not understanding and adapting to that is a recipe for enjoying prison food. And penis.
If I shoot a dog attacking my dog, and my dog is only considered property, then did I only destroy someone else's property that was 'vandalizing' my property? I guess they could call the firing wreckless endangerment out something else. I guess I'll just expect the dog may turn on me.
We need to change our laws to protect good people who defend themselves against criminals no matter the harm done to the criminals. There is no reason why a good person who uses deadly force to stop or prevent criminals should face prosecution simply due to the angle of bullet entry into the criminal. There are many cases of criminals firing shots at victims while running away, sometimes killing the good victim or innocent bystanders.
So explain to me why it is not OK to use a gun to defend your dog against another dog? I agree you can't shoot a human to defend a dog, but destroying property to protect property would seem to be fine to me (and it's something that farmers do all the time to defend their livestock or crops from wild animals)
In most jurisdictions, yes. You can use a firearm to stop an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to a human, but not to merely protect property. Pets are property.
@@ASPextra What would someone even be charged with in that context? A dog attacks an owners dog, the owner kills the attacking dog to defend his property rather than risk being mailed trying to break it up by hand, and then what? Brandishing charge? Negligent discharge? Public endangerment?
Usually some combination of illegal discharge of a firearm within city limits, reckless endangerment, and if there are people around, even aggravated assault.
That's kidnapping, unless they have the legal right to have custody of the child and it's a custody thing or something. Stopping a kidnapping with deadly force is always justified conduct because it's a huge risk of death or great bodily injury to the person being kidnapped.
My buddy had to pony up good chuck of cash in a self defense case where the perpetrator was running away but still shooting with his back turned as he was shooting. Thank God for surveillance cameras
Then why did he have to pony up a good chunk of cash? Was it for defense funds he could not sue the prosecuting attorney for or for criminal defense?
I love that you are covering this particular topic since so many people are horribly misinformed on this subject.
I remember the kyle rittenhouse trial, the prosecutor made a huge deal about the first guy getting shot in the back. Then when the details came out, we learned kyle and the guy were face to face, the guy was lunging towards him, and he was shot through the top of his shoulderblade and through his torso. Prosecutors are the scum of the earth and they will do everything they can to make a shot to the back the highlight of their case.
As John has said many times...'it is not can I shot him/her, but must I shot him/her'. Thanks John for these words of advise. Thanks for sharing.
Let’s not forget the sage legal advice from Ron White, “You can start shootin em in the leg until they turn around… cuz eventually, they’re gonna get curious.”
Ask Garak from Deep Space Nine.
Garak : When the Klingons attacked the station, Gul Dukat and I were fighting side by side. At one point, he turned his back to me, and I must admit that for a moment, he made a very tempting target.
Odo : You'd shoot a man in the back?
Garak : Well, it's the safest way, isn't it?
I love this reference.
Massad Ayoob mentions in his lethal force book that in .25 of a second, a person can turn lateral to you. In .5 of a second, they can have their back turned to you. So if you're attacked and you start pumping out .25 splits, and let's say it takes you .5 of a second to realize the attacker is turning around to retreat, you could get at least 2 rounds in his side and/or back.
Yes indeed.
In the gunfight I was in the guy who was trying to kill me ran a few yards then turned back around, started shooting again, and shot my friend in the mouth. I think once someone is trying their best to kill you they are still a deadly threat until they are out of range. I had already hit him multiple times center mass but that doesn’t mean that the can’t still kill you while they are dying.
Man I am so sorry to hear that!
LIKED Tim out of the gate with his dinner party story about the white coats and their supposed title, "that's DR, to you..." 😂 🙄
If in a gunfight, you don't wait for the perp to turn back and face you.. or you'll die. And perps can run and still fire backwards. Helps to have cameras though.
Shouldn't the Attorney Extraordinare promote using a pencil......like John Wick.....cuz that way, you arent shooting them 😜
If you are following the “must I shoot this person” standard, 99% of the time, you should be good
John, You can have a cat and a dog. I had 4 dogs and a cat and the cat was the BOSS.
The gun is the last tool in your posession to be used. It is used why you are in fear of life and not using it will cause more harm to you and others than using it to end a life. Never ask if, or may I use it. Only use it if you must use it!!
John. We have given you a lot of Slack with your new hairstyle but it’s turned into Jerry curls for Christ’s sake! Lol
Thanks, glad you like it!
Im glad you guys cleared the air regarding this particular one, because for *YEARS* I heard that very thing John said in the beginning
"You can't shoot someone in the back or you'll 100% go to prison!"
The idea of giving a criminal a fair fight is bizarre to me. One would be literally making it easier for a criminal to complete an act of wrong-doing, then calling it "honorable." That would be like Dwight Eisenhower giving the Nazis a heads-up before D-day to make sure the fight was fair! 😵💫
The judge is the one to say who is criminal. Up to that point you're giving a suspect a fair fight.
The Rules of Engagement in war are different than in self-defense. Not understanding and adapting to that is a recipe for enjoying prison food. And penis.
"Hi Everyone welcome to John's Briefs!"
Are we not doing phrasing any more?
😂
I cant believe that got past Legal
😂
😂
ruclips.net/video/xECUrlnXCqk/видео.html
11:08 South Park reference
I don't think "John's Breifs" is the best way start the show lol
ruclips.net/video/xECUrlnXCqk/видео.html
If I shoot a dog attacking my dog, and my dog is only considered property, then did I only destroy someone else's property that was 'vandalizing' my property? I guess they could call the firing wreckless endangerment out something else. I guess I'll just expect the dog may turn on me.
Yeah the bottom line is that in most cities it is a crime to discharge a firearm other than in defense of a human.
We need to change our laws to protect good people who defend themselves against criminals no matter the harm done to the criminals. There is no reason why a good person who uses deadly force to stop or prevent criminals should face prosecution simply due to the angle of bullet entry into the criminal. There are many cases of criminals firing shots at victims while running away, sometimes killing the good victim or innocent bystanders.
The law is in place that way.
@@ASPextra ,
Then why are so many innocent victim defenders charged with crimes for the act of defending themselves against criminals?
So my question is if someone hits you in the head with a brick and runs away and as they are running away can you shoot them ???
If they are not an immediate deadly threat you should not shoot them.
@@ASPextrabut what if he did a backflip and takes a gun out his waist and shoot you. What if what if.
Makes you wanna walk around with a body camera.
I know some people who do, but I think that is probably not needed for most people.
John, did you fire your barber?
In fact, I did. Haven't had a haircut since September.
Force Institute talks about these things.
As the first FSI grad ever who was not a sworn officer, I know it well!
So explain to me why it is not OK to use a gun to defend your dog against another dog? I agree you can't shoot a human to defend a dog, but destroying property to protect property would seem to be fine to me (and it's something that farmers do all the time to defend their livestock or crops from wild animals)
Using a firearm to protect property is not allowed. That's why.
@@ASPextra Even if the target of the firearm is an animal? So it's illegal for farmers to kill predators which are killing their livestock?
In some jurisdictions, in rural areas, it's not prosecuted at all because you're actually hunting predators. That's a different thing.
Wait a sec, if someone's dog attacks my pet and I shoot it then I'm in the wrong?
Shooting an animal is completely different than shooting a person.
Not if you expect the dog is going to attack you and it makes moves to do so. Video?
In most jurisdictions, yes. You can use a firearm to stop an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to a human, but not to merely protect property. Pets are property.
@@ASPextra What would someone even be charged with in that context? A dog attacks an owners dog, the owner kills the attacking dog to defend his property rather than risk being mailed trying to break it up by hand, and then what? Brandishing charge? Negligent discharge? Public endangerment?
Usually some combination of illegal discharge of a firearm within city limits, reckless endangerment, and if there are people around, even aggravated assault.
Great video. But please mic up. The camera mic sucks.
We are both wearing mics.
Why FLP over USCCA?
Better coverage. They allow plea agreements.
Can you shoot someone if they grab your child and run off with them?
That's kidnapping, unless they have the legal right to have custody of the child and it's a custody thing or something. Stopping a kidnapping with deadly force is always justified conduct because it's a huge risk of death or great bodily injury to the person being kidnapped.