General Categories > Carry Issues

Violent flash mobs

<< < (5/5)

unfy:
bullets prepped and in the bath, can return to typing :D


I wonder if we're kinda... getting away from the question and turned it into a generic self defense thing.  If there is another thread that addresses this... feel free to point me to it :D

------

re: "kill" vs "mugger"

he has a knife pointed at me and is very threatening.  he only wants me wallet or he'll kill me.  according to the statute - i am required to give up my wallet.  This would be 28-1409.4.b in effect.  Obviously the mugger doesn't claim to own it or similar (ie: just theft).

is discharging a firearm always considered 'lethal' or 'deadly'  ?  Or am I silly and able to shoot in the knee ?  Drawing / aiming the weapon is force, and possibly enough to end the situation... but... can't count on being that lucky.

I may not have to retreat in my home, but if he only wants my tv or wedding ring, i have to give it up, no ?  Again, not retreating, but I am averting force via 28-1409.4.b


re-reading 28-1414.2 .... i think i have to revise (ie: correct / was wrong) my ascertations towards 'good samaritan towards strangers' stuff.  maybe.

if someone is in the situation of grievous harm (as per 28-1409) ... i would actually venture that coming to the rescue would be ... okay ? Maybe ?  naturally, depending on when you stop the situation... if it's before serious things have happened to act as evidence, then.... bad guy can just claim the intent wasn't going to go all the way with it etc.... ?

how this relates to flash mobs.... sigh.  i'd undoubtedly definitely have shirt out of the way and hand resting on firearm prolly (durrr, anyone would undoubtedly).

my head hurts.  probably the vinegar smell isn't helping (from plating experiment).  i'll have to come back to this over the weekend :P

armed and humorous:
The laws, as best that I can understand them, allow for the use of force to protect a third party, given certain requirements that have already been mentioned (that the person being protected would have been justified in using force themselves, etc.).  They also allow for protection of property by force.  It gets a bit tricky here, but if you believe that in using anything less than deadly force to stop the burglar/robber, you subject yourself to risk of serious bodily harm or death, or if the thief has already threatened serious bodily harm or deathk, then deadly force is justified.  You don't have to simply let the thief take off with your possessions.  You come home and find someone heading out of your house with your TV, computer, whatever, and you tell him to stop and put it down.  He blows you off and keeps heading toward his getaway car.  You grab him and try to stop him.  He turns around and brandishes a switchblade knife.  You now fear for your life, so you pull your carry weapon and shoot the guy.  Justified, as I read the law.  (see below)

In Nebraska, the use of deadly force is not authorized to protect property unless the actor believes:

(a) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to dispossess him of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or

(b) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to commit or consummate arson, burglary, robbery or other felonious theft or property destruction and either:

(i) Has employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the actor; or

(ii) The use of force other than deadly force to prevent the commission or the consummation of the crime would expose the actor or another in his presence to substantial danger of serious bodily harm.

Neb. Rev. Stat. sec. 28-1411.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page